Ton Plomp

So you 'Cant have your cake and eat it too' Fast or beauty. Pick one. (and I don't find the formula box 'beautiful' ) Ton

I've used the Wiki to document the different XControls capabilities (some observations and tricks). document the Code Capture Tool document Mercurial integration These are items that go beyond the LabVIEW help and is stuff I would share on our internal Wiki, however by sharing it public this information is widely available. Ton

I don't really have an issue on this (however some direct attribution/link would be nice). However it brings up a strange angle in the whole NI.COM license discussion: The code is licensed under the BSD (while I don't specify it, attribution should be given). The ni.com license says 'Upload it and it belongs to us' (Shaun will love that wording) So uploading / sharing the code under the BSD license on the internet is OK, UNLESS you post it to ni.com. (other sites might be banned as well). Concluding the user is not breaking the BSD license, (if he attributes), but is breaking the ni.com EULA. Ton

I have no idea what changed, but currently I get 40% improvement. Ton

I only get a speed improvement of 4% LabVIEW 2012 Win7 32-bit Intel i5-2410M @2.3 GHz Ton

I don't fully understand what happens from your description. You have an event structure with a timeout of 60.000 ms? The second logging you get, what timestamp does that have? Is it a logging close to the other one, or is it after 5 minutes? Can you post the code? Ton

You've connected the wrong output of the String to number function: Ton PS the dark side is a nick name we have for the NI forums.

Does it help if you use seperate LabVIEW data folders? Ton

No, the RGT is not compatible with the Open Office. The RGT uses the ActiveX instance of MS Office to build it's documents. However you could create your own classes that inherit from the RGT ones that communicates with Open Office. There is allready some code available. Ton

Hello François, I have issues with UI tools expansion packs. The controls don't show up in the editor. I see the issue in LV 2011 and LV 2012 This are my installed packages Here's how it looks: Debugging shows that: <vi.lib>\addons\LAVA\controls_lava_lib_ui_tools.mnu should point to: <user.lib>\_LavaCR\UI Tools\ Attached is a fix for this. controls_lava_lib_ui_tools.zip Ton

You can set the focues of a VI with the control property 'Has Focus'. The following snippets, loads a string, sets focus and selects the whole string: Ton

You get the reference in the event 'Shortcut menu activation', you can then use this reference to set the 'value'. Ton

No I did something different (but equally far more powerfull). First a typedef with some standard data, and a variant: Now I can call a VI with these args, and it will insert the args into the Cluster: That's why I added the 'extract variant' into th eJSON parser: This Way I can extend my calls with args without having to deal with them. And I still have a nice typedef with the generic information present. To be clear, Args was just a normal cluster, nothing Varianty about it. Ton

Write to Spreadsheet file, does not produce an Excel file. It produces a file that Excel converts into an Excel file (you could open the file with any text editor like Notepad). Excel files like you need are build using the Excel ActiveX interface, and the Report Generation Toolkit is a method to control that. However I won't be surprised if there isn't some VBA on the internet (Excel code) to merge Excel files into one file with different sheets per source file. Ton

Currently it's based in LV 2011. An abstraction away from JSON sounds interesting.

I don't really have an opinion on the different errors, but we need to make sure we parse as much as possible. On a library/package I think we should look into making this Team LAVA worthy, and thus follow the Guidelines for locations and packaging. What should the name be? JSON LabVIEW (as it currently is) JSON API (which I prefer) And examples should be placed under the 'Examples' menu Ton PS For anyone interested in development, James, Shaun and I are totally working on it (see for yourself)

I added another 'mode' for this VI: Maintain phase, dismiss missed To show the effect of the three modes I made this table (with a dT of 50 msec), all times are in msec: Graphical this is the representation: Now for the difference between 'Maintain phase' and 'Maintain phase, dismiss missed' some more zooming in: Where at 3.35, 3.36 and 3.51 a call was made. All three models will return a True for the first call (the wait time before was > 500 msec). When 'Maintain phase' is selected 3.36 returns a True as well, (the wait time was > 1000 msec). The 3.51 call returns True for the 'Maintain phase' and for 'Maintain phase, dismiss missed', since the phase is stuck at 3.50. 'Since last' returns a False since the time since the last trigger is < 500 msec). Here's my current VI: Periodic Trigger.vi and the test VI Periodic TriggerTest.vi so you can run your own scenarios. Ton