Justin Goeres

QUOTE(eaolson @ Nov 21 2007, 09:23 AM) Confirmed on my machine: WinXP / LV85.

QUOTE(Cool-LV @ Nov 21 2007, 12:35 AM) I don't see what's crazy about that at all. That's exactly what I'd do. There's a list of several thousand different colors (with names!) here. It wouldn't be terribly difficult to write a VI to parse the RGB values out of that page and create an array with their values. Use that array as a constant in a color-lookup function, and you're done. If you only need a couple hundred decent colors, you could also work from LabVIEW's 221 valid icon colors. It's trivial to generate those programmatically. You can also do the same thing with web-safe colors and get roughly the same result.

QUOTE(Cool-LV @ Nov 21 2007, 12:35 AM) I don't see what's crazy about that at all. That's exactly what I'd do. There's a list of several thousand different colors (with names!) here. It wouldn't be terribly difficult to write a VI to parse the RGB values out of that page and create an array with their values. Use that array as a constant in a color-lookup function, and you're done. If you only need a couple hundred decent colors, you could also work from LabVIEW's 221 valid icon colors. It's trivial to generate those programmatically. You can also do the same thing with web-safe colors and get roughly the same result.

I've always said that the best thing about a good delusion is that any sufficiently localized segment of the reasoning behind it is internally self-consistent. I.e. all the small steps along the way seem to make sense one-by-one, but when one gets to the end and finally looks up, the end result is pretty shocking.

I've always said that the best thing about a good delusion is that any sufficiently localized segment of the reasoning behind it is internally self-consistent. I.e. all the small steps along the way seem to make sense one-by-one, but when one gets to the end and finally looks up, the end result is pretty shocking.

QUOTE(Norm Kirchner @ Nov 20 2007, 10:26 AM) Also known as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrature_encoder' target="_blank">Quadrature Encoding.

If you would like more information on this "brain" device before you buy one, this educational programme can help you. "Look Around You: Brain" I am certainly convinced to purchase one!

QUOTE(bayram_mercan @ Nov 19 2007, 02:22 AM) It sounds like you're missing the http://joule.ni.com/nidu/cds/view/p/id/570/lang/en' target="_blank">NI-DAQ Drivers you need to talk to the hardware. Be careful to read all the info associated with that link. Depending on your specific situation you might need a down-rev version of NI-DAQ. You don't need to upgrade to LV82 to do data acquisition, but if upgrading is an option for you I'd do it just because LV82 is a much more advanced product than LV61 was.

QUOTE(Cool-LV @ Nov 14 2007, 07:13 PM) Like rolfk said, it's still really hard to understand what you're trying to do. If you want to map/unmap network drives (with or without password) the other suggestion above is a good one. If you're trying to access information about network adapters in the system, you can do that with the ipconfig command: C:\>ipconfig /?USAGE: ipconfig [/? | /all | /renew [adapter] | /release [adapter] | /flushdns | /displaydns | /registerdns | /showclassid adapter | /setclassid adapter [classid] ]...etc...

Things like these are why the Internet is mankind's greatest invention.

QUOTE(paololt @ Nov 17 2007, 10:09 AM) You're on the right track, and there are a lot of different ways you can solve the problem. Here's a pretty straightforward way. Everything you see here is in your Boolean, String, and Numeric palettes. http://lavag.org/old_files/monthly_11_2007/post-2992-1195320875.png' target="_blank">

QUOTE(paololt @ Nov 17 2007, 03:25 AM) What have you done so far and where are you stuck? If you can post some of your code we can probably point you in the right direction.

QUOTE(newbie_2007 @ Nov 16 2007, 06:14 PM) Welcome to the board :thumbup: . I think the information in http://forums.lavag.org/Text-file-to-excel-through-Labview-t2149.html' target="_blank">this thread will help you. I found it by using the LAVA search (in the upper right corner of your browser window) and searching for 'excel'.

QUOTE(ccbb1 @ Nov 16 2007, 01:21 PM) You'll have to do it in multiple steps. Each version of LabVIEW can save back to a certain subset of previous versions of LabVIEW. I don't have 8.2.1 open right now, but my guess is that it can only save back to LabVIEW 8.0. So you'd have to save the VI from 8.2.1 -> 8.0, then open it in 8.0 and save it from 8.0 -> 7.1(.1), then open it in 7.1(.1) and save it from 7.1(.1) -> 7.0. There's an outside shot that you could go all the way from 8.0 to 7.0 in one step, but my recollection is that you can't. You might be able to work out an arrangement with somebody around here to do it for you if you don't have those intermediate versions and if your project isn't huge.

I, for one, am overjoyed that The One True Creator, His Holiness The Flying Spaghetti Monster (may eternal garnishments of basil and olive oil be upon Him) has finally chosen to reveal Himself on our humble discussion forums. Truly, in His sight we are blessed! In this moment The One True Language and The One True Ruler of The Universe are united! Let us rejoice with feasts of piping hot spaghetti and build a beer volcano, that we may show our devotion to The Creator and He may in turn show us favor! And let Pastafarianism continue its march to the far corners of the world! RAmen.

QUOTE(m3nth @ Nov 15 2007, 01:11 PM) Check your PMs.

QUOTE(hooovahh @ Nov 13 2007, 07:13 AM) That is a vast oversimplification, and it's incorrect. In America today, if you generate creative output (such as program code) you automatically own the copyright to it, and the copyright does not transfer to anyone else unless there is an agreement in place that specifies it should transfer. Unless you have specifically assigned the copyright of that work to the entity you're doing the work for, you still own the copyright on it. This is a point that is widely misunderstood, especially among programmers. An exception to that is a situation where the work you are doing is defined as work-for-hire. Work-for-hire is a very specific contractual concept that basically waives upfront most or all the rights normally granted to you under copyright. But (in the case of contracting) work must be defined as work-for hire. If your contract doesn't say it is, it's not. Note that the situation is somewhat different when you're working as an employee of a company. In that case, you are typically acting as an agent of the company when you're doing the work. In that sense, you never create the code in the first place -- The Company does. So The Company receive all the benefits of copyright as the original author of the work; no transfer of copyright is necessary.

I'm going to play a bit of devil's advocate on this one. I read the geek dad posting via the link from Michael's blog, but I didn't exactly get the impression that Chris Anderson "hates" graphical programming. Here's sort of the relevant part to me: QUOTE The only statement I truly take issue with there is where he says "there's nothing better for understanding programming logic than properly tabbed and commented code, all in a column of text as God intended." While I find that statement both laughably inaccurate and dripping with bias, it sounds to me like he's not specifically dissing graphical programming in general, but rather lamenting the limitations of NXT-G. It's disappointing, though, that his solution to the problem was to run back to the warm, calming embrace of his beloved plaintext source files . As everyone in the choir here knows, that's throwing the baby (graphical programming) out with the bathwater (missing flow structures in NXT-G). I would've told him to just buy the LabVIEW Student Edition and gaze in awe as all his problems melted away.

And look where it's gotten us... Congrats to Michael, and to LAVA! :beer:

QUOTE(Aristos Queue @ Nov 10 2007, 05:48 PM) I used to feel (pre LV85) more strongly about this particular issue. The problem in LV82 was that if you opened a dynamic dispatch VI from the block diagram it would only open the most ancestral version of it, which frequently doesn't have any useful code in it. If I was going to have to go to the Project window and dig up the particular implementation I wanted to look at, knowing that in advance from a glyph on the icon saved me several clicks, several seconds, and some confusion. The dialog in LV85 that lets you select a specific implementation mitigates that a lot, in my experience.

QUOTE(Michael_Aivaliotis @ Nov 10 2007, 02:09 PM) I think this will trigger it: Reply to a post. Reply again to the same post immediately (so it merges). Click the "Edit" button under your post to edit it and choose Full Edit (although I think Quick Edit does it, too). When the editor loads the linebreaks in the post you're editing will be gone. I just tried something like that over in the Testing forum and it removed the linebreaks. I'll try to narrow down exactly what makes it happen, though -- I run into it a lot because I'm a compulsive post editor.

QUOTE(i2dx2 @ Nov 10 2007, 12:08 PM) That has been my suspicion, since no threading-related gymnastics I did had any effect .

I've been meaning to write a post about this exact issue for a while, but hadn't gotten around to it. Thanks for bringing it up. :thumbup: I, too, see this as a huge problem for classes. It hasn't stopped me from using them because they're so great in so many other ways . But I'd go so far as to say that I probably test my LVOOP code less than my non-LVOOP code, or at least I test it in larger chunks, because the effort required to actually do the tests is greater. I have wondered, though, how LVOOP fits in with the idea of automated unit testing. Maybe the impact of not being able to set class data element values directly on the front panel is less in that context?

QUOTE(alfa @ Nov 10 2007, 12:58 AM) I think the problem is that the poster in that thread is trying to tie a model of elementary particle interaction to a model of interaction between infinitely more complicated systems (i.e. between humans & each other, humans & the universe, etc.). While it may be interesting (and fruitful!) to consider the idea of a sort of Unified Field Theory of Consciousness, I think it's reasonable for physicists to be skeptical that any such theory would bear anything more than a nominal resemblance to their own work. To call it crackpottery might seem rude, but it's pretty apt.

QUOTE(eaolson @ Nov 10 2007, 08:48 AM) I've fallen into using The GIMP for my icons. I have a bunch of little badges (mostly culled from free icon collections, like Nuvola, Crystal Clear, and of course the NI Icon Library) in a couple dozen layers in an image template. Things like a disk, a queue symbol, a hammer, a magic wand, various directional arrows, a checkmark, an 'X', etc. Then I have a couple more layers for the background and the banner at the top. When I need an icon for a VI, I show/hide the badges I need to get the look I want, then I do a Copy Visible and paste the image into my VI icon (or class icon template, etc.). I usually leave a little space in the icon to add a little text in the LV icon editor. The downside is that the icons are in glorious 24-bit color over in GIMP, so sometimes LabVIEW's crappy dithering algorithm kind of ruins them on the way over. But overall, I like my graphical icons a lot better than my old all-text or mostly-text ones.