Jump to content

Michael Aivaliotis

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Michael Aivaliotis

  1. So just adding info here for future googlers.

    There is an NI KB article on how to cleanup the cache here: https://knowledge.ni.com/KnowledgeArticleDetails?id=kA00Z0000019KdtSAE&l=en-US

    In there it also mentions an ini token that eliminates cache creation completely:


    you can add a token to your nipkg.ini to prevent the caching of packages in the future. The nipkg.ini is located at \%localappdata%\National Instruments\NI Package Manager\nipkg.ini.

    Make sure you add the token below the [nipkg] line so it looks like:


    • Like 1

  2. 16 hours ago, JKSH said:

    There's an Idea Exchange entry about this for LabVIEW CG, but it really should extend to NXG too: https://forums.ni.com/t5/NI-Package-Management-Idea/Install-the-same-package-to-multiple-versions-of-LabVIEW/idi-p/3965419

    Well it kinda does apply to both considering NIPM should manage both CG and NXG. I've heard through a reliable source that NI is seriously intent in solving this problem in NIPM for both CG and NXG.

  3. 12 hours ago, gregoryj said:

    Ok great. My router is far away from my desk, so I'd like to use wifi after the initial set up. Just ordered the raspberry pi and excited to play around with it!

    Well, you could plug your computer directly into the raspi port, no router needed. Or purchase a cheap usb to ethernet dongle and add an extra port to your PC. This is what I do for my cRIO work.


  4. My understanding is that Maps are the same as variant attributes. Except with maps, obviously you don't have the overhead of VariantToData or DataToVariant, when inserting data or looking up data. That can be a huge overhead in some cases. Plus you need support code to prevent variant conversion errors when using the wrong typecast.

    Variant attributes are slightly more powerful than Maps because you can insert any type. However, one could argue that this is a characteristic that leads to messy designs. The same variant wire could contain mixed values types within it. Each with its' own type conversion VIs. I think if you've been using variant attributes and it works for you, I don't think you need to rewrite everything. But they definitely need to be considered in new designs. Because you don't have the overhead of creating all the glue VIs for the data conversion, they are frictionless to use and start using out of the box.

  5. 5 hours ago, Neil Pate said:

    In order to resize an array you have to click on the tiny dot in the middle of the drag handle that only appears if your mouse is leaving the control and is some weird distance way from the border.


    In other words, in this picture in order to get the resize drag handle to appear I have to move my mouse over the control, then out a little bit into the middle of space with no visual indication how far out to move it until the horizontal bar appears and then find the tiny dot in the middle and then drag that. 🤮

    How could this UX make it through 8 years of development?

    2020-05-07 22-49-46.mkv 3.22 MB · 3 downloads

    i watched the video. Yikes, ya, that's pure garbage.

  6. On 5/6/2020 at 2:43 AM, ShaunR said:

    Your argument is inconsistent. If it's not a priority then making a change to remove it is allocating resource to "the least important". Leaving it in would be the least impactful. However. If you are going to change it then you might as well make it a "Preference" since that is clearly what it is. You don't seem to have a preference or, at least, are indifferent. So why advocate taking away a feature that other people obviously feel strongly about?

    Inconsistent to a post i made 10 years ago? Besides, that was related to CG. I'm not advocating for removing an engrained CG feature. I thought we were discussing NXG. My assumption is this feature hasn't even beed implemented in NXG. There is a lot more work required in NXG to make it even barely usable. Lack of continuous run is not a problem in NXG. Lack of everything, is a problem.

    • Like 1

  7. 4 hours ago, ShaunR said:

    Just make it an ini/preference setting. The main tenor of that thread seems to be "I'm not very precise so please remove it" which, from that low point, then devolves into "my work-flow is better than your work-flow".

    I can live without it. On the level of priorities for NXG, this has to be the least important. Just drop the vi on the diagram and wrap a while loop.

  8. 8 hours ago, Neil Pate said:

    I am a bit late to the Map party. I love them though, thanks NI. 🤩

    For those that have not tried them, take a quick look. I have only used the Map a few times (so cannot comment on Sets) but the API is nice and simple. Goodbye Variant Attributes 🙂

    I can't live without them.

  • Create New...

Important Information

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