crelf

QUOTE(AnalogKid2DigitalMan @ Feb 20 2008, 02:38 PM) Ohhh - I've got puh-lenty of those! QUOTE(AnalogKid2DigitalMan @ Feb 20 2008, 02:38 PM) Try DigiKey #'s 501-1113-ND, 501-1114-ND, and 501-1053-ND (all from Pomona) They look great - thanks! QUOTE(tcplomp @ Feb 20 2008, 02:46 PM) You had a spare room needing for your PXI/SCXI stuff and didn't had one of those? Yeah - I already have a rack to hold my spare PXI cards, but nothing for short cables: http://lavag.org/old_files/monthly_02_2008/post-181-1203537478.jpg' target="_blank"> (sorry about the quality - it's a camera phone)

QUOTE(Yen @ Feb 20 2008, 01:35 PM) :thumbup:

Hi All, I'm lookking for something (it's name escapes me for the moment) that holds cables - I used to have one at a previous employer: it's a rack that attaches to the wall and you can hang your RS-232 cables on it, as well as your 1m power leads, and your banana plug patch cables, etc. Anyone know what this is called? Better yet, anyone know of a type they use and like? Even better yet, anyone got a couple that they don't need anymore? cheers crelf -edit Found one!

QUOTE(dbyers3 @ Feb 20 2008, 12:58 PM) Looks like you're after imperative programming instead of dataflow programming?

QUOTE(JDave @ Feb 20 2008, 12:32 PM) Ooooooo - that'd be nice. I wonder if that could be extended to subVIs as well...

QUOTE(robijn @ Feb 20 2008, 11:34 AM) I wanna gold-plated toilet seat!

QUOTE(Daklu @ Feb 20 2008, 12:18 AM) Meh - I like my idea better

QUOTE(orko @ Feb 20 2008, 01:03 AM) My work here is done

QUOTE(gmart @ Feb 19 2008, 08:56 PM) I know - I'm suggesting that it could QUOTE(gmart @ Feb 19 2008, 08:56 PM) The above is case is why people would want the option to view massive clusters as icons. There's pros and cons of every arguement - I'd be *okay* with a cluster constant icon (let's not limit this to typedefs) as long as what it was is really obvious (let users edit the icon, but keep some kind of glyph that identifies it as a constant icon). QUOTE(tcplomp @ Feb 20 2008, 01:52 AM) Instead of dropping a VI contant, you could drop a control, hide the FP-part and display it as an icon. That makes me feel very dirty (and not in a good way). You suggesting setting the default value of a hidden control, just to make the BD more readable? Sure, it'd work, but it's a horrible dirty filthy kludge. (I *hate* hidden FP elements - yes, *hate* them. I've yet to see a justifiable reason to use them. That said, that's for another thread - please don't hijack this one arguing this point!)

QUOTE(souske @ Feb 19 2008, 06:29 PM) ...and add some arbitrary time in case your OS encounters something during it's run that it didn't during your testing

QUOTE(gmart @ Feb 19 2008, 06:10 PM) I think that it's the expected behaviour for a strict type def, but not an ordinary run-of-the-mill general type def. QUOTE(gmart @ Feb 19 2008, 06:10 PM) I'm curious. What is your objection to an option of having constant icons? Because it's a constant, not a link to a constant. I like how I can look at a diagram and work out what it does pretty quickly - representing a constant by another means is just one more step that I need to go through to understand the code. Another example of hiding things is some implimentations of express VIs - take "Time Delay" for instance - I'm not against express VIs per se (I think they have their place) but I never understood why you'd want to basically move a constant to some other place, with no desernable improvement to the code (except the error clusters, of course :thumbup: ). In short, representing constants by any other means reduces the readability of the block diagram (unless, obviously, that constant is a cluster of arrays of clusters of...)

QUOTE(souske @ Feb 19 2008, 04:53 PM) Ahhhhh - now that's a whole new ball game! Your assumptions now look much more solid!

QUOTE(gmart @ Feb 19 2008, 04:44 PM) I assume you put the quotes there because you disagree? I know why it happens, but I still don't think that it should. Each instance of the constant retains its' size when I move it, save a VI, etc, so why does it reset when something unrealted to size changes in the typedef source? Why can't each instance remain the size it was? I assume that it's easier for you guys to have each instance simply replaced, but when you have large (real estate-wise) constants in multiple locations, it can be a real pain resizing them all. It may not be a bug per se, but I certainly think that it's an unwanted "feature".

QUOTE(cmay @ Feb 19 2008, 03:41 PM) Can you post an example of the problem? If your code's proprietary, then can you recreate the issue with a simple example?

QUOTE(Daklu @ Feb 19 2008, 02:33 PM) So you want a diagram disable structure that disables the code outside the structure, instead of inside it? That's a freakin' awsome idea! :thumbup:

QUOTE(Daklu @ Feb 19 2008, 02:52 PM) I don't agree with replacing constants with icons, but I certainly would like to see the resizing typedef bug fixed.

QUOTE(BobHamburger @ Feb 19 2008, 01:01 PM) QUOTE(eaolson @ Feb 19 2008, 02:08 PM) I have to disagree with this. Running just a quick check, I can get an empty For loop to run at 5-7 nanoseconds, with occasional excursions to about 20 ns. I think Bob's point was the word "reliably" (emphasis added above), which I understood to be the original poster's assumption.QUOTE(Yen @ Feb 19 2008, 02:21 PM) Windows is not a real-time OS and as such can correctly decide that it wants to do something which is more important than what LabVIEW is doing. :thumbup:

QUOTE(Aristos Queue @ Feb 19 2008, 02:07 PM) That was my point - I should have made it more explicitly than I did.

I love the title of chapter 2: "LabVIEW Rocks", but am not so keen on the title of chapter 1.1: "LabVIEW Sucks"

QUOTE(guruthilak@yahoo.com @ Feb 19 2008, 12:03 AM) Depends on how you use it - "abort VI" is called outside the VI in question, so you're forcing an abnormal end, whereas "stop" can be called in the VI, which is fine.

QUOTE(souske @ Feb 19 2008, 06:39 AM) That's not a safe assumption - it depends on what else your PC is doing. What OS are you using? If you really want determinism, you should look at an RTOS. Read more here and here.

QUOTE(alfa @ Feb 19 2008, 02:51 AM) It's only difficult for 97.7% of people.

QUOTE(Jim Kring @ Feb 18 2008, 04:54 PM) I'm always happy and how could I not beam when you post threads like this one?!?

QUOTE(Jim Kring @ Feb 18 2008, 03:35 PM) http://lavag.org/old_files/monthly_02_2008/post-181-1203370996.gif' target="_blank"> This makes crelf *very* happy!

QUOTE(blueguard @ Feb 18 2008, 10:57 AM) Prices vary arond the world - your best bet is to call your local NI rep - they'll give you the most accurate price.