Jump to content

David Boyd

Members
  • Content Count

    162
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by David Boyd

  1. Reading twenty-plus-year old articles like that really starts to make me feel ancient. I was about to reply with the obligatory grumble about preferred-case spelling ("it's LabVIEW!"), and instead looked up the author. Found out he passed away just before MacWorld Expo 2007. Thanks for locating and posting this. Dave
  2. I still have my "Power to Make It Simple" tee shirt that I "won" at the end of my three-day Basics I class (I think it was fall of '97... does that seem right?). The black is pretty faded. I was excited to upgrade from 4.1 and try out the miraculous "undo". And real multithreading (under NT 4.0)...
  3. Thanks, @hooovahh, for pointing me to those older discussions, which I probably totally missed. @drjdpowell's comment about a clone's reference having guaranteed validity when passed to its subVIs doesn't seem to apply to my/@Neil Pate's use case - we're sending a cloneVI ref to another VI via messaging. So no telling when the original VI ref might go out of scope. And I just realized that my demo code for launching off clones (and then later gathering their refs for subpanel use), explicitly closes the original VI ref after they're launched. There is still a static ref on the caller's
  4. I was browsing through class code from the Actor Framework (ashamed to say I haven't used this framework, yet, but that's changing), and stumbled across what appears to be a dire warning. (See the attached, or if you'd rather, read the BD comment here.) I've used an architecture for years now where I launch N clones of a VI using the ACBR in fire-and-forget mode, and subsequently the clones get a VIref to themselves and register that (with an assigned index) by message back to a GUI VI. The GUI then allows the user to switch through the clones' FPs to be shown in a subpan
  5. I might have a tactical advantage there... who would bother to load up on old LabVIEW versions just to look at my rookie LV4.0 code. (Now, where's that chart Scott Hannahs did that shows the last version that'll open 4.0...?) Actually, I have plenty of much newer code I'm ashamed of, so who am I kidding?
  6. I spent a little time this afternoon searching Info-LabVIEW ca. 2002, and you're absolutely right, there WAS a lot of confusion back then about how to apply the "new" paradigm effectively. IMO, more than any other feature added since I started using LabVIEW (4.0/4.1), the ES really reset the way I thought about LV programming architectures. There's good lengthy discussion pertaining to the ES in those Info-LV archives, BTW, especially a few excellent posts by Greg McKaskle describing how they made the design decisions the way they did. I'd recommend looking back through that material to
  7. OK, having heard from all my multiple-ES LAVA colleagues, I'm seriously in need of a reality check. AQ: do you recall any early caveats from NI (either in release notes, or help, tutorials, online discussion, etc.) that warned against the practice? I'm vaguely recalling there was an issue with the way ESes invoked some behind-the-scenes setup as soon as the VI was loaded into memory, well before user code started executing. Or maybe I was living in some alternate reality back in the 6.1 days? Dave
  8. Somewhere in the dawn of the ES (6.1? I think), while wrapping my head around this great new paradigm, I took it as a commandment that THOU SHALT HAVE NO MORE THAN ONE EVENT STRUCTURE PER DIAGRAM. I've frequently been appalled by the code of some of my coworkers who blithely put down 2, 3, or 4 ESes in separate loops. (Heck, I don't even like to have more than one ES in an entire execution hierarchy, maybe I'm carrying it too far?.) So it wouldn't bother me. But I am curious, AQ, if you went ahead with this enforced limitation, what kind of upgrade mutation could possibly save such (IMH
  9. Just so I don't run afoul of Michael, a summary: I have been in touch with Jim by email. With his help I got set up with TortoiseSVN and have pulled down the OpenG string source, for starters. I plan to update Scan Variant into String per the code above (but not with the FXP support, just yet) and include some new vectors in the test harness for enums (at present there are none). Beyond this string fix, I'd like to add FXP to the known types in lvdata, but that will propagate through string and variantconfig and perhaps others. I suppose if Mads wants to take on the array package changes w
  10. Attached is the existing code for Scan Variant to String_ogtk and a proposed alternative/fix to the enum case.
  11. Michael: so noted, will do. I just created an account on SF (as respdave). Also noted in the OpenG buglist here that Jim McNally reported the enum-to-Scan Variant From String issue just a few months back. I'll try to post my proposed fix here shortly so others can evaluate it. Should I switch this to the 'Developers' forum at this point? Also: I've eliminated LV2009 from my work machine, my oldest installation is 2011. Do I need to back-save to 2009 for discussion/review purposes? Dave
  12. Here are my notes for modifying OpenG LabVIEW Data, String, and VariantConfig to support FXP. I did this originally to support FXPs in structures populated from INI files. I am not certain of what other packages have lv_data as a dependency that might also be affected. _OpenG.liblvdatalvdata.llbType Descriptor Enumeration__ogtk.ctl:- change value 0x5F to "FXP"propagate type changes_OpenG.liblvdatalvdata.llbGet Data Name from TD__ogtk.vi:add case "FXP" (as dupe of case "I8".."CXT", "Boolean", "Variant")change Pstring offset from 4 to 36_OpenG.libstringstring.llbFormat Variant Into String_
  13. So, if I created an ID on SourceForge, I could check in my updates, as long as I did the work in... LV2009? (Is that the backmost version currently still supported?) And then those in charge could accept those changes for a future release, or modify, or reject/rollback? Meantime, if I posted here the textual description of changes, it would garner some attention and hopefully provoke a discussion? Does that sound like the proper way forward? Thanks for the replies. Dave
  14. Not sure whether I should post here, or on the developers' forum... so here goes... I've used parts of the OpenG tools for a number of years, particularly the data tools, string, and variant config packages. Recently I've taken to modifying a few VIs and typedefs and carefully segregating out the modified bits. The specific modification I'd like to discuss was the inclusion of support within the variant and string routines for fixed-point datatype. (I have a concise list of the changes needed to support FXP.) So, first question: are any of the members of the OpenG developers' commun
  15. I've used Digi devices for years, with few issues. Biggest system to date has four Etherlite 160's (total of 64 ports); sixty ports are tied to UUTs spewing 6400 char/sec each, all of which is digested by my LabVIEW application. The other four ports are used for instrumentation, doing query/response (a few dozen chars per message, as fast as the instrument responds). These terminal servers are setup to use the Digi RealPort driver, which provides standard Windows comm API, so VISA treats them like local asynch serial. When you get up to this level of activity, with array-launched VI clo
  16. Thanks, Crystal. As one of the "Old Guard", you already (IMO) have a credential that surpasses anything a CLD certifies. Funny, though, perhaps we're not as tightly regulated as you, but we've never given a second thought here to migrating to newer releases when starting fresh projects. Sometimes I think we are still flying a bit under the radar. We focus more on qualification of test systems, rather than V&V of our LabVIEW-developed code apart from those systems. If we were to do more formal software verification, we'd surely need to add personnel to handle that workload. Anyway, I
  17. I'm scheduled to take my CLD recert exam on Monday afternoon; this will be my third recert (took the CLD in Austin during NI Week 2004). As my LAVA listing shows, I've been using LabVIEW continuously for nearly thirteen years. I consider myself a pretty sharp guy (LV-wise), with a background in automated test, and the programming (in various environments) that goes with it, since the early eighties. My current employer didn't ask me to attain certification, I just did it on a lark. I forget the specific scores, but I know that the original CLD and two subsequent CLD-R's were all scored in
  18. Is Windows server 2003 a supported target for LabVIEW 2009? I know that it specifically WAS NOT under prior versions, though over the years there have been reports of folks running LV apps on WS2003. I'm just asking to point out that you may not be able to get support from NI for any issues you have. Whether this is an issue for you, I couldn't say. Along other lines, have you checked the Windows event log on the target? Perhaps there is an application error event getting recorded which could suggest what's going on. Good luck! Dave
  19. I've been bitten by my misunderstanding of custom scaling and min/max definitions too. Classic example: I have a 0-15psi pressure transmitter that's 4-20mA current loop. I create a custom scale thusly: prescaled units in Amps scaled units in psi slope 937.5 intercept (-3.75) I specify this custom scale while defining a virtual channel that uses an NI current input, and am tempted to specify the channel min and max as 0-15 psi. Bad choice on my part! While trying to perform a software cal on a sensor, if the raw current reading is 3.7ma, the scaled value is pinned to zero psi even bef
  20. QUOTE (LV_FPGA_SE @ Jan 21 2009, 08:02 PM) Geez, Christian, that was priceless. So simple an idea, it just took one clever person to conceive of it and create the website.I didn't piss myself, but I narrowly avoided blowing coffee across my laptop keyboard. Thanks for this. Dave
  21. QUOTE (Michael_Aivaliotis @ Nov 17 2008, 02:58 PM) Any updates, Michael? Just wondering. Wasn't there an issue in the past with some key from Google that went invalid with a server move/domain change? Dave
  22. QUOTE (miab2234 @ Dec 7 2008, 12:06 PM) Well, the Match Pattern you added back in is still not doing anything for you, and is still not needed in the example. See how the string enters the left border of the While Loop? As a solid little rectangle? That is a simple tunnel. This means that the entire input string is on the wire on the inside, unchanging through all the loop iterations. Your Match Pattern looks for a semicolon character, and since there isn't one (in your revised sample data), passes the entire string out of its 'Before Match' terminal. Every iteration, unchanged. The
  23. I've attached a modified verson of your VI. It's a little simpler than you had. Look on the block diagram for a few notes. Best of luck, Dave QUOTE (miab2234 @ Dec 4 2008, 10:38 PM)
  24. Tried the member map recently and couldn't get it to work. Page loads OK and the map frame draws, but no contents (neither map not pins). This was using IE7 on my work laptop, both behind the corporate firewall and from home. I've also tried from my home PC, using IE7 and FireFox 3.03, all same results. Is this a known issue? Dave
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.