crelf

So here's something neat - ERLPhase sells recorder and relay systems that monitor and partially control pretty-much all of the electrical grids world-wide. Guess who made the test systems that test them before the go online? note: the rack isn't that short - the guy standing next to it has been photoshopped in

Those can be two very different things, my friend!

I can't argue with that The RSS feed means I'm always connected

I think it's misleading - you've essentially got inputs and outputs that aren't used for anything (no state data, no inheritance), so why have them there? It would lead me to think that there's either state data (more probable) or you're forcing inheritance (less probable). Why have any inputs/outputs that aren't doing anything? Doing so suggests to others that they have a purpose. Unless, of course, you're reserving them for future fucntionality, and then you should label them so and make them "Optional" connections.

Um, thank you?

More importantly, you ride a Honda Shadow Aero? I ride a Shadow ACE.

No, you said: Which I took to mean I couldn't use the word "object" unless it refered to a software engineering object. The generic hierachy could be anything, not necessarily a software engineering class.

I'm not sure if you talking about LAVA and/or other fourm(s), but rest assured that we try really hard to leave threads alone, especially those in the LAVA Lounge, where just about anything goes. There have been occasional moderator interventions, but they usually only come when a member contacts us and asks us to do so - and even then we make a judgement call on whether to step in or not. Even then we usually ask everyone on the thread to cool down for a while. It's very rare for us to lock a thread, and almost unheard of for us to delete a thread (unless it's spam, for example). If you think a post or thread of yours has been unfaily handled, please let us know - anything we delete remains in the moderator trash can for a period of time, and we'll review it for un-deletion. We're a group of people, so we might make a call that's wrong, and we're always open to taking a second look. That's the spirit! Right - except that it's difficult to articulate a truth with with our inefficient communcation abilities, and even more difficult to perceive one communicated to us. In short, we spin, based on our own experiences, environment, and perceptions of those we're conveying to/from.

Disgruntled? Perhaps. Coward? Not sure how you can make that leap. Well put Paul! Kudos +1. Moved to it's own thread

I agree. I disagree. I think of the thing on the FP and connector pane as the thing - not the type of thing. If you can use a more specific name then go for it, but if it really is an "object" in whatever field it's being applied to then I say use that name - don't avoid it just because there's a LabVIEW datatype with the same name.

I'd say yes. OO's big three are encapsulation, instantiation, and inheritance. Since you don't have any privates (*giggle*) you don't need encapsulation (unless you want private *methods* - that's an important distinction), instantiation isn't limited to LVOOP since everything's by-val anyway) and you don't need ingeritance. That said, there's no harm in leaving it as a class - as jgcode said, namespacing could be an issue, and if you're okay with the class as it is, then I don't think you need to demote it. Hmmmm - that's a good question. I don't think it's an issue. I see a lvlib as a collection of related VIs, whereas a class is a collection of related VIs that act on an object - I'm assuming that you're still going to have an object, right? Like a cluster of something that passes between the VIs? If so, I'd stay with a class - it's easier to manage (the prototype of the object is in the class, not as a separate ctl file). Using the work "Object" doesn't mean that it must be of type class. If it can be considered an object (eg" a file, something in the real world, a DAQ card, etc) then that's fine. That said, I usually don't use the word "object" in the names of my objects - because that's the type of the input/output. It'be like calling your numeric inputs and outputs "Numeric In" and "Numeric Out" - call them what they actually represent (eg: "Configuration File" or "DAQ Card", etc).

Glad you're back on this tread Paul - I love to start my week with a good giggle.

In case it's lost in the fine print: That's right people - it's free to all CLAs! Now you don't have any excuses not to be there!

Yes, and yes. The quality metric can be useful in tracking when a software product has acheived a steady state. It's common to think of a project as finished when two things occur: when all the requirements are met, and when the quality it acceptable. I'll leave it to another time to discuss "acceptable" So, in tracking the requirements coverage (NIRG is seriously excellent for that - it's seriously one of NI's least appreciated offerings - see an example of one of our project templates below) and quality, you don't have to rely on "I'm-almost-done" statements from engineers (hey, we all know how flaky they can be).

Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean, I don't see this as a bad habit at all. I often start with a large (not always maxmized, but usually lfar larger than I think I'll need) BD, write my code, then I arrange things to a more pleasing layout, then I resize the window to suit. That one resize at the end is much better than several resizes in the middle to make the BD larger - that would really get in the way of my (data)flow. Reference please - I've never heard that. Damn right! Although we have the white noise thing going on here (and it makes a big difference), we have a "quiet room" set up with two mega-workstations with docks, comfy chairs (including a couple for reading) where anyone can go to get away from it all. The rules are simple: no cell phones no talking if the door is closed, don't bother anyone in there unless it's an emergency (eg: the "building is on fire!", not "Can I eat your pizza rolls in the freezer?") I once avoided my boss for days in that room...

I'm still not quite sure what wikileaks has done wrong. There seems to be a lot of angst, but not much info on what laws they've broken.