Grampa_of_Oliva_n_Eden

Yes, "The devil is in the details." (Ross Perot ?) So how am I supposed to reply to that? Well since the topic is passing milestones let me point out another milestone. BEER* Dennis Knutson has now posted more than 8000 replies to the NI-Developer Exchange (Yes, I know the NI-Developer Exchange is evil). WE have been posting some acks of his effort to help LV in this thread. http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?boar...2&jump=true But I am not posting to advertise that thread but to share a story that Dennis posted some time ago. I repeat it here without permision. " I've got my own VEE story. Several years ago, I was hired to develop some LabVIEW software by a company that will remain nameless (sort of). I was given a cubicle and a rack of test equipment. It got a little strange because right around the corner was the development team for VEE. Not a team developing in VEE but the team that wrote VEE (see what I mean about sort of nameless). Swapped some stories and a few methods of doing some tests. At that time, VEE was not compiled and it took at least an order of magnitude longer to do some analysis routines in VEE. I was also approached and asked if I would like to switch from being a LabVIEW Alliance member to doing VEE programming. Doing a little market analysis, I determined that I would probably starve because of the lack of VEE users. I understand that VEE has since improved it's execution speed but it's market share is far behind LabVIEW. I've seen some figures comparing how long it takes to develop a LabVIEW program for GPIB instrument control versus one in VEE. One in particular seemed to be biased as the study was financed by Agilent but the end result seemed to indicate that an experienced programmer of either would take roughly the same amount of time. The problem is, there are many applications that VEE would take much longer or just be impossible to do. It does not have nearly the number of add-ons that LabVIEW does (try running VEE on a PDA or a real-time system or doing vision). It has hardly any native instrument drivers (they mostly use IVI or plug&play DLLs). Third party DAQ manufacturers will often have a LabVIEW library written and seldom one for VEE. These are the important factors for me and I would guess for the majority of users. " The original can be found here (see reply #9). http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?boar...=146961#M146961 Ben BEER* This is an invocation of Godwin^-1 Law to counteract the effect of mentioning the NI-Dev Exchange

Which I appreciate greatly. Thank you Joe for taking the lead on that effort! :thumbup: Ben

I would believe that number. Ben

We can count on you to keep us updated on the results of that off-line conversation, can't we? Ben

I saw your cross post to the NI forum and am responding here to let NI reply. 1) I believe the VISA driver has ben updated recently (to handl esomething with events). Have you tried the latest and greatest version (this week)? 2) THe are more than one "enable termination character" property. Check the "out of the box" version of the "Serail Port Init" that ships with LV. I have nothing more to offer at this time. Ben

I have tried to get this number myself and failed. THe closest you can get is take a look at the user ID pages on the NI Exchange. Example http://forums.ni.com/ni/view_profile?user.id=70065 The "70065" is the user ID. Play around with that number to choose other registered users. That does not tell you how many user there are, just how many are registerd with NI. Ben

Nice Chris! Leave it to VIE to do this first... Ben

Agreed. I think it was JPD who was using a signature that said that a "single VI is word a 1000 lines of code." But then again, I'd love to be working under that type of project estimating (provided someone funds it). I have been using "VI" s where the VI is waht can be developed in an hour. I am curious abou this subject as well, Ben

I have not heard much mention of 64 bit (Windows XP) machines and LV yet. I am having trouble getting the driver to work correctly when I deploy the LV application and driver to a 64 bit machine. The 32 bit machines run just fine using LV 7.1. I even tried it with LV 8 and the latest and greatest version of VISA and still no-go. So.... Anyone been down this path before? Ben PS I also posted this Q to the NI forum see here http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?boar...9&jump=true

When reading thru the release notes, I do not recall seeing mention of GOOP. I do remember a rather long list of problems. No I did not download it. Just looked at the release notes and then is wasn gone. Ben

I Had also posted this Q to the NI Exchange here. http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?boar...9&jump=true There, Dennis Knutson suggested I right click on the "inf" file and choose "Isnstall". THat was key to the adventure but I also listed some other notes in that thread. So, I am OK for now and I hope the above spares others the pains I went through (or at least reduces the number of times you have to restore the backup) Ben

FIrst lets get this out of the way. "BEN, you did not write it down? You idiot!" I have been using a driver that that was developed using by one of NI's internal consulting group using the "VISA Driver Development Wizard". When I first installed it following the supplied instructions, it did not work. I then called the NI Developer that did the development and followed his directions to get it working. Now this is where the "did not write it down" part comes in. I was so excited I proceeded to test and develop and did not write down whatever it was I did to get it going. My memory says that I had to type something at a command prompt, I suspect it was registration realted. So a year latter the customer now wants me to develop a duplicate of my original system. Well it turns out the NI developer has quit and finding a resource to fill in the blanks is not happening real fast. Has anyone here figured out what it takes to transfer the "driver" to another machine? I will supply more details if that would help but I will save the bandwidth unless requested. Ben

This NI KB article on Hyperthreading may help. http://zone.ni.com/devzone/conceptd.nsf/we...6256e2900586d41 Ben

It looks like you answered your own Q. Yes it works just fine. Ben

Hi Yen, When you get to my age you are happy with rembering things and being able to distinguish between memories and dreams. Thanks for confirming that this is not just a dream. :thumbup: I can not comment on what version of LV. Ben

This sounds familiar. If you change the constant to a control does the problem go away? Ben

I remember waiting for a TA to critique some code I had written. The only feed-back I was offered was "Too many comments!" Icons in LV, when properly used, are part of the documentation. In an application with hundreds of sub-VI's I can spot an icon I am after much faster than reading text. Ben

Ditto that. Another variation is to put a typdef'd cluster in a sub-VI and bundle by name to produce what is similar to a "#Define" construct. The sub-VI is used any time I would have used the "variable". It yields similar to results of the "pre-compiling" in other languages. Change one place, and update realized in all places that need to know. Do a nice icon and your development team members aren't even tempted to look inside. Ben

I have never seen that either. Can you copy the 3-d graph off to another VI and post a demo that demonstrates this? Ben

I do not have LV 8 up on a machine at the moment but assuming you already have the 24 bits in the low 24 bits of an I32, I'd would take advantage of bitwise operations and test the sign bit using a mask of "00000000100000000000000000000" and if the result is NOT =0 then do an or with a mask of "1111111100000000000000000000000" See image. I would also to the "Or-ing" inside a case structure so that you are not doing work needlessly. I hope this helps, Ben

BS in Engineering Physics. I have more that 10,000 hrs of LV development experience. More if you count my recreational development. Ben

Thank you Chris! I get "bonus points" for Bear jokes. Ben

Well then that settles it. I am part of the 97.7%. Funny how these conversations seem to loop back on themselves. Ben

After reading the post by Gary and yourself, I am learning that it must just be a Pittsburgh thing. I feel like such an "arse". Ben

Pet peev must respond: I collect old books. I have an un-abridged Webster's Dictionary from about 1850 (or was that 1940?). In the introduction, the editor talked about English being both a phonetic language and a dynamic one where the pronounciation changes with time. These two observation led them to conclude that the proper speel of word SHOULD change over time. Somewhere between 1850(1940) and 1960 (or maybe earlier) someone decided that there was an absolute corrct way to spell words and any other letter combination was WRONG. Example: When was the last time you heard some say "sy-mul-tain-e-us" (simultaneous). THe "mul" has become "mo" Done ranting, Ben