crelf

QUOTE (neB @ Dec 22 2008, 11:33 AM) That sounds really cool Ben - any chance of seeing a demo?

Have you selected a driver to be used and initialized the camera in MAX?

I'm starting to think that Jim's got shares in NI's marketing department...

QUOTE (ASTDan @ Dec 20 2008, 09:38 AM) I don't know what state you're in Minh, but if it's NSW then the local electrical code requires you to be a licenses electrician to alter the wiring in your home. Not that that stopped me from doing so when I lived there

QUOTE (jcarmody @ Dec 19 2008, 08:58 PM) Did I hear someone in the background say "is that what it's suppoed to do?" QUOTE (Michael_Aivaliotis @ Dec 19 2008, 09:57 PM) VCRs, the end of an era. Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww...

QUOTE (AnalogKid2DigitalMan @ Dec 19 2008, 02:31 PM) Proctologically speaking...

QUOTE (asbo @ Dec 19 2008, 10:37 AM) Right - but code in the disable structures is discarded at compile time. QUOTE (Antoine Châlons @ Dec 19 2008, 10:47 AM) Code was executing quite slower and I had some issues when building applications, maybe these issues have been fixed since then though.. Have you ever had these problems ? Nope - I have no issues when using the diagram or conditional diagram disable structures.

QUOTE (shoneill @ Dec 19 2008, 10:00 AM) dqGOOP is just based on queues (hence the name), so it's cross platform too.

QUOTE (sachsm @ Dec 19 2008, 08:50 AM) Yep - this optimization was introduced in 8.0.

QUOTE (alfa @ Dec 19 2008, 04:02 AM) I learned a new word today, and it was suprisingly not anything like I expected it to be - thanks LAVA!

QUOTE (ejensen @ Dec 18 2008, 04:56 PM) Are you saying that LAVA is outdated?!?! Just kidding I agree with jhoskins - look at TestStand for the automated test scheduling, and LabVIEW for the individual tests. If your company is interested in meeting schedules, I strongly suggest bringing in a consulant to, at least at the early stages, help you design your system architectures (and maybe give you a bit of LabVIEW and TestStand training to boot).

QUOTE (Neville D @ Dec 18 2008, 01:11 PM) yet...

QUOTE (Val Brown @ Dec 18 2008, 05:05 PM) Where does it say that? Is that in a vision document on ni.com somewhere? I'm not trying to be beligerent - I actually want to know if that's an official mission statement from NI or not. ...and if it is, maybe it should be "as far as practical" instead QUOTE (Val Brown @ Dec 17 2008, 07:22 PM) Differing approaches (by ref vs by value, private vendor vs native LV, etc) all lead to code that can not be reused easily across differing implementations... Yes, and no. When I want by-val I use LV-OOP (i have no other choice, not that I want one). When I do by-ref I use dqGOOP (code is native LabVEIW queues, so I can use it anywhere), unless I need something more beefy (inheritance, etc), then I'd use Endevo's GOOP (that does have transferability limitations). QUOTE (Val Brown @ Dec 18 2008, 10:47 AM) It seems to me that all of this inconsistency really defeats one of the core rationales for OOP within LV. I think that you're confusing the reasons for using OO with the reasons to use a particular version of OO.

QUOTE (Maca @ Dec 15 2008, 06:52 PM)

QUOTE (BrokenArrow @ Dec 15 2008, 09:56 AM) This won't exactly solve your issue, but you could use the http://vista.viengineering.com/detail.aspx?ID=17' rel='nofollow' target="_blank">LabVIEW Documentation Generator and point it at your LabVIEW folder. It won't give you documentation of everything that ships with LabVIEW, but it'll give you everything that's currently installed.

QUOTE (Antoine Châlons @ Dec 16 2008, 06:14 AM) :thumbup:

Obviously my brain was fried on Friday afternoon: I hadn't even thought of U8 pattern matching. I've updated my code and now the pattern matching is no longer the bottleneck. Now I know why I keep hanging out here :thumbup: Thanks everyone!

Good one Antoine - thanks for stepping up to help out! :thumbup:

OK - it's Friday afternoon and we have our office Christmas party tonight, so my brain's checked out for the day Here's the issue: I get a 1D array of Booleans from an instrument, and I need to write an event to disk whenever that array matches some predefined patterns. Sounds pretty straight forward, right? Here's the twist: the predefined patterns can have a wildcard in them (the pattern is a 1D array of values that could a mixture of TRUE, FALSE or DON'T_CARE. Here's some examples (note: the "." represents "DON'T_CARE"): Match: pattern = 1 0 1 0 . 0 1 0instrument = 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 Match: pattern = 1 0 1 0 . 0 1 0instrument = 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 Not A Match pattern = 1 0 1 0 . 0 1 0instrument = 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 So I've implemented this quickly by converting the pattern to string of 0s, 1s and .s (TRUE to "1", FALSE to "0", and DON'T_CARE to ".") then I used the pattern match primative to see if there's a match - and it works great! The issue is that it's too slow for my application (I have up to 1000 possible patterns to match). I thought about converting everything to Booleans, but the what do I do with the DON'T_CARE? I thought about converting everything to an I8, but I'm not sure how to pattern match that. Anyone got any ideas? I've attached an example pattern file.

QUOTE (Antoine Châlons @ Dec 12 2008, 10:28 AM) I don't think so - it looks like you're covering most of the use cases.

QUOTE (Antoine Châlons @ Dec 12 2008, 08:54 AM) How comprehensive and mature is the API that you've created? It might be a good candidate for the http://forums.lavag.org/downloads.html' target="_blank">LAVA Code Respository.

QUOTE (neB @ Dec 11 2008, 11:30 AM) Yep - that's why I said: QUOTE (crelf @ Dec 11 2008, 11:01 AM) note: I'm only talking about fixed priced projects here I don't mean to say that we only do fixed-price projects - that's certainly not the case. I assumed that the original question was referring to a fixed-price project model and you assumed a time-and-materials project model. Maybe it'll be a mixture of the two? I figure that you're more into LabVIEW consulting, whereas we prefer to work in the complete turn-key solution domain. Tomi: let us know which model you're interested in so we can target our responses more accurately. QUOTE (neB @ Dec 11 2008, 11:30 AM) A good example of the types of projects I get is the one I worked yesterday. The project spec read like "Up to two weeks of on-site support as required." How do you write a test plan for that, "Have eighty hours been billed?, If true then done, else keep working." I'd call that a term of the contract, not a system requirement.

QUOTE (neB @ Dec 11 2008, 09:40 AM) Indeed. That's why is important the you really make sure that the customer knows how important the requirements are - they are signing thier names to what they're going to get. If they want to change those requirements during the project, then that's perfectly fine, but there will be consequences. Changes don't always impact schedules negatively - I've issued several zero dollar (and even some negative dollar) ECOs in the past. QUOTE (neB @ Dec 11 2008, 09:40 AM) After i delever they have to verify the functionality before I get paid. Our processes differ on that point - we* create an ATP (acceptance test plan) that the customer agrees on, and then we do (at least) two test rounds: a FAT and a SAT (and dry runs of each, of course). The customer does not do any formal testing - they are present for the SAT, and the SAT is based on the ATP which is directly correlated with the requirements through a traceability matrix. There is opportunity for the customer to make suggestions on things he/she doesn't like, but that's a requirements change right there (note: I'm only talking about fixed priced projects here). QUOTE (neB @ Dec 11 2008, 09:40 AM) (I) set their expectations that there WILL be bugs. Never. If the SAT results meet the requirements, then there are no bugs. There may be issues that the customer wants addressed (and can do so through the ECO process), but there are never bugs. I know it sounds like I'm arguing semantics here, but I can assure you that I'm not. These are crucial distinctions that can make or break a project (and therefore a company) due to process immaturity. QUOTE (neB @ Dec 11 2008, 09:40 AM) Similarly, if I have a spec and a test for that spec, but the customer doesn't like the behaviour, then "to hell with the test" its getting fixed! So how do you know when you're finished? When the system meets the requirements, or when the customer is happy? If you've got a process-mature customer, then those are the same thing. QUOTE (neB @ Dec 11 2008, 09:40 AM) Do whatever it takes to make your customer "look good" to their boss. Wow. ---- *Disclaimer: our project process can't be summarized in one post, so this is a generalized version of just part of it.

QUOTE (asbo @ Dec 10 2008, 02:09 PM) Our work here is done.