crelf

The code seems okay - where are you getting the error? Do you get the error when only one of the loops is enabled (ie: put a disable structure around one of them)?

I don't think you have a bandwidth problem at all - it's a memory issue. Can you upload your code so we can look at it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHH0Ebke-lU

Excellent summary Casey - thanks for getting back to us!

No you don't. I told my wife to beat me over the head with my book if I ever get the idea to write another one That said, I've got an idea to write another one - just don't tell my wife!

Don't make me slap you.

Wow!

Jeff used to be a plretty big playa in the LabVIEW world (he was the guy that started open source LabVIEW), but he hasn't been involved in software engineering in a while (yes, he's the Flatland guy). Jeff wrote the previous editions of LabVIEW for Everyone, which is why, I assume, his name is still on the book - I figure the 3rd edition is mostly Jim's work.

Sure - but so is the science against it. There are inseparable - you can't confirm one without denying the other.

You might want to check this out too.

That's really really sad mate - the NI LVOOP course is an *excellent* course! I'd put it up there with NI's best, including the RT course. Sounds like whoever was teaching the course might have been able to manage that a little better...

Calling all TestStand users! While I love TestStand, I've got some ideas on how it could be improved, and I'm sure you do too. NI recently launched a new platform for getting and tracking ideas on how to improve thier products called the NI Idea Exchange. If you haven't seen what it's about, see the intro video here and then have a wander through the wildly successful LabVIEW Idea Exchange here. There's already a LabVIEW Idea Exchange, a LabVIEW RT Idea Exchange and a LabVIEW FPGA Idea Exchange, so why not a TestStand Idea Exchange? Well, setting it up and supporting it takes time and resources, so, we need to let NI know that we think having one is worthwhile. If you're interested in furthering the development of TestStand, you need to let NI know that you're interested in a TestStand Idea Exchange! If the idea of a TestStand Idea Exchange appeals to you, please post here to show your support. Crosspost from here.

Concentric happiness.

Is very nice!

Right, and if you're allowed to download and install VIPM then I can't see why you wouldn't be allowed to download and install OpenG and JKI packages using the same method...

Unless you want to use VIs available thorugh the VI Package Network (like OpenG and JKI sutff) then you don't need to be connected to the internet to use VIPM internally - you can just set up and access your reuse packages internally (or off an internal network using the enterprise edition of VIPM).

That sounds like the second step most people do in the re-use road (the first step is to recognise that you need reuse ). Monolithic reuse libraries are nothing new, but they aren't really a solution. They work great for a while, but the quickly become unmanageable, and are usually left to die Actually, none of those will really solve your reuse dilema - sounds like you need VIPM - seriously.

I knew there had to be something out there that did this! "...the boot sequence can be specified, and when desired, an operating system can be rebooted independently of the other(s). In order to facilitate communication between operating systems, the RTS solution also provides a configurable user-shared memory as well as a TCP/IP based virtual network driver." That is uber-cool! Okay, so now the question becomes: what does NI's Hypervisor have that this one doesn't? A lsightly-related question: I wonder if you can do something in parallel(ish) with virtual machines (I guess it depends on just what level of jitter you'll accept, and your reasons for having an RT system).

I like these sort of thought experiments. Yes, you'd need another OS for your LabVIEW code to run on, but I'm not sure how you'd boot it. Also, there's the shared hardware outside of the CPU that you'd need to consider (buses and memory and peripherals, oh my!) I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but it'd sure be fun to try... Perhaps there are already untilities out there that allow you to split the cores? How would you communicate between the LabVIEW RT-ish OS and the host? I guess if you have 2 network cards in there (one for each OS) and plugged in a cross-over cable?

I agree with almost all of that - I don't think our models are so different, except that I don't keep *all* of my project-specific (you called it "editable") code in the project - only stuff I expect to edit, or higher level VIs where I can drill down a level or two to those other project-specific VIs tha I might need to change once or twice. Otherwise I can see the project space getting a little unruly. That said, there are cases when I'll have almost everything specifically listed in myu project (ie: not in dependancies).

Thanks Ben - I'm really glad you said that - it means a lot to me

I wish I had done the same.

Actually, if you re-read my posts in this thread without the filter that you seem to have applied to them then you'll notice that I don't come down on either side - I'm asking questions, just like you are, I'm just asking them in different ways. I'm not a socialist, democrat (in the true definition of the word), a republican (in the politicized definition of the word), a Labour, Liberal, Green, Independant, Tory or anything else for that matter (well, maybe a constitutional monachist for the moment ). In fact, I'm about as anti-political as you can get. I'm disgusted like you are that some moron fiddled the numbers for whatever reason (you'll notice that from some of my posts) and that that moron, in a way, represents the field of engineering, but I'm also not so political that I'm going to assume that means that all of the research in the field is bogus. I'm also not going to try to use emotionally-charged terminology to try to bait a response out of anyone. If you want to apply this horrific root issue to other socialtal problems like redistribution of wealth then I gotta say that I'm way out of my depth there, so I choose not to engage (since, it seems, that any attempt at conjecture on my part is assumed to be my staunch politcal and sociatal view of the world, which it most-certainly is not). I'm all for debate, and I live to to think outside the box - but don't for a second assume that every question I post in the LAVA lounge is representative of my views - they're questions, not statements. That said, if the conjectures and ideas in this or any other thread form your view of me, then so be it - there's nothing I can do about that other than state my case and let you make up your mind. Until then, I'd ask you to keep away from personal profiling - if you want to talk about climate change, redistribution of wealth, systems of government or whatever other topic then go for it, but don't try to characterize me, especially since I haven't even done that myself.

You can set it repository wide (I think that only works for new items?), or set it on a file-by-file basis (right click on the file, TortoiseSVN, properties, New..., property name = svn:needs-lock). Our IT dept has a script that runs after TortoiseSVN install that makes our clients add the needs-lock property to all items added to the repo - not sure if I can share that, but let me know if that's what you're asking for.