Jump to content

Darren

NI
  • Content Count

    592
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    53

Darren last won the day on April 13

Darren had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

208

2 Followers

About Darren

  • Rank
    The 500 club
  • Birthday 10/02/1977

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Austin, TX

Contact Methods

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2019
  • Since
    1999

Recent Profile Visitors

3,984 profile views
  1. Do you see similar results when running the benchmarks separately, i.e. one at a time in separate VIs as opposed to in parallel in the same VI?
  2. Hmm, I should have actually looked at the Help before doing that... our tech writer kindly pointed out that Visible Items > Error Explanation Text is already present in the Error Ring help.
  3. I updated the Bug report to mention that this should be in the help. Also, I talk a lot about use cases for the Error Ring (including mentioning several of the points I brought up in this post) in my What To Expect When You're Expecting an Error presentation here: http://bit.ly/dnatterrors
  4. I have reported the documentation issues (both the 'page not found' error, and the suggestion about placing error rings in case structures) to R&D as Bug 1413653. Don't forget you can deselect Visible Items > Error Explanation Text if you need your Error Rings to be more compact:
  5. During code reviews I always tell people to remove 'No Error' error rings and replace them with error cluster constants. As for non-0 Error Rings, they should always be in a case structure that only executes in the situation where you need that Error Ring value.
  6. I've worked a bit with the node and Python 3.9.1 and have had no issues so far.
  7. I checked with LabVIEW R&D, they said there is no way to determine this information in G code.
  8. (I'm not at a machine with LabVIEW at the moment, so I apologize if I'm not remembering some of this correctly) I see that the static VI reference in your screenshot does not have the little orange star in the corner, which means it's not a strict reference. If you were to wire that reference into a Call By Reference function, you wouldn't see a connector pane pattern. So as your diagram is currently implemented, the types of those wires are identical since the static VI reference wire doesn't contain any type info. Isn't that right? Can you right-click the static VI reference and select
  9. Are you talking about inspecting the data type of the two wires with the blue arrows to discern which one is strict and which one is not? Or are you asking for something else?
  10. Dr. Powell pretty much gave my answer (stated more eloquently ). It's something to look out for when branching wires... by-value data is now a copy, while by-reference still refers to the same thing. Be aware of that when you start mixing by-value and by-reference inside class member data.
  11. Probably best for a new thread, but I'm curious about why you claim it's easier to use git with files with no spaces. In my (admittedly non-advanced) dealings with git I haven't seen any problems with files with spaces. Now repo names with spaces? Yes, that has caused issues. But I've been working with very large codebases in git containing VIs and project libraries/classes with normal naming conventions (including spaces) and have had no issues.
  12. I've been following this thread with interest, I love SC2. Looking forward to seeing what you come up with next.
  13. It's likely referring to an internal discussion forum within NI.
  14. I remember having to figure this out when generating tokens for the LabVIEW Cloud Toolkit for Azure. I remember that there was some weird stuff I had to figure out, but I've long since forgotten how I did it. On the bright side, the toolkit is open source, you can browse through the source code here to see how I did it.
  15. Yup, Quick Drop itself (along with several other G-based LabVIEW features) uses Global Data Get/Set. Standard disclaimers apply (private methods are not documented or supported by NI), but these should get you what you need. I agree with Yair that you need to make sure to namespace your data appropriately so it doesn't potentially collide with other Global Data.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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