Val Brown

I'm there too. CRELF, I thought it was AQ who said he was paying your ticket. Hmmm, maybe it was something about "punching your ticket".....oh well....

FWIW I agree with this stance. It's actually very simple. LV is NOT open source. Never has been and very, very likely never will be. Nor, IMHO, should it be. If someone believes otherwise than build a lookalike and open it up to everyone. I'll expect that to happen about the same time that about the same instant that we discover how to travel time and, to verify that, I'll be there to congratulate you on both achievements.

Yes, I've done that but all that does is list the files but I don't believe I can remove them from that project via that window. And thanks to everyone for their suggestions so far.

I have a project file that has a rather large number of now orphaned items in it and I'm wondering if anyone can come up with a great idea for a VI to course through the project and removing those items. I really don't want to have to slog my way through doing it manually.

Mine is/was a classic mistake -- I hit Post when I "only" meant to paste. But I do wonder if you've read "Laws of Form". It does resolve the Godel's incompleteness assertion. And, actually spoken languages doesn't have punctuation as does written language and that's has been part of the real challenge of live, duplex language translators and "speakers" being implemented in computers. The artifice is quite good and getting better by leaps and bounds, but until "pregnant pauses" and such can be implemented for receptive and passive speech, the distinction will remain.

Except that all such syntaxes -- and semantics -- rely on a temporality "within them" that resolves the paradox a la G. Spencer Brown's "Laws of Form" (one of my favorite books). That's the easiest way to notice the resolution of seemingly paradoxical statements (that aren't) as well as Godel's statement. Notice the statement (or process) reenter itself and, as it does so, it can appear to oscillate in its value. And, yes, it sounds like I also had a different experience of mathematics back in High School than what many did -- Calculus in grade 9 to start with.

I think it's safe to say "Yep" also means "Explore and/or use at your own risk" regardless of what you might find via the search suggested above.

I just added a comment to that blog. We'll see what happens. How can I gain access to the Linkedin group? I think I missed the identifier for me in the prior posts.

Yes, that's definitely the way to go.

Well...... it CAN be done.... ....but it can be very painful...

Yes this is a problem with how LV implemented the ActiveX container for WMP. I've filed SR and even CARs on this for YEARS and NI has simply ignored them. I do know that it would be VERY EASY fix for them to implement, but there's nothing else to do but something like what you've implemented or very byzantine embedding of WMP in VB constructs.

The real problem with fundamentalist's is that they really take out all of the fun. They actually should be called ..."damentalists".....

OK well then. That makes sense.

Thanks for the toolkit but I can't hear any audio on any of the demos using Safari or FIrefox, both with Flash 10 installed. Any good ideas?

And, of course, I'm sitting here, writing this feeling VERY jealous.....but you all already knew that. Have a great time and post about it.....

Congratulations!!! :beer_mug:

....as I said, new capability: wizards and dispensation to "announce" them, surreptitiously.

hmmmmmmmmm sounds like a non-announcement announcement of an as yet unknown capability. To quote an old time radio show: "Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows...." We'll just have to wait to see what happens next.

I'm for the CR approach.

I think you're thinking of vi.lib\platform\fileVersionInfo.llb\FileVersionInfo.vi If so look at: https://decibel.ni.com/content/docs/DOC-3733

same for me...

Una mas....

Right, some folks are either pretty young (who remembers FORTRAN and PL/1?) or not as well exposed to alternate platforms. Personally I'm glad to be out of assembly limbo as well as the next couple of rungs up towards the Paradisio... Even Ken didn't keep the original Unix releases as pure as some thought. There are some realities in terms of time and resources that ultimately constrain real-world development. Seems like some academics never quite get that -- but I do definitely respect their idealism and commitment.

Mike, I think your doing a pretty pure virtual call here using setmp().... The issue isn't about whether or not to use references. It's about whether OO implementations are natively byref or byval. One COULD say that all of the text that everyone sees using a traditional C++ really are references to constructs in assembly, based on compiler called in the build process. Similarly one COULD also say that all of the graphics that are seen when using LV are also references to, ultimately, the same underlying constructs in assembly. But none of that is really the point is it?

OK, just checking.... And I know that paradigm-shifting look of "My God. It's full of stars..." that shows up on students' faces when they really do see something in a completely new way.