Jump to content
News about the LabVIEW Wiki! Read more... ×


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


About gregoryj

  • Rank
    LAVA groupie

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2016
  • Since

Recent Profile Visitors

342 profile views
  1. gregoryj

    LabVIEW Content Landing Page

    Hi Q, it looks like the admin is named "RTOS", hasn't been active since 2008 though. http://www.wikidot.com/user:info/rtos
  2. I was actually surprised when I stumbled across this page where NI makes the following recommendations: For LabVIEW 20xx: Continue using VIPM for distributing source/development code (e.g. reuse libraries, development tools, Tools Network, ...) Use NIPM for distributing and updating deployed applications (e.g. componentized applications, application EXE, PPLs, application plug-ins, NI drivers and software, LabVIEW Run-Time Engine, …). The goal with NXG would be to have NIPM handle source code as well... I thought about these trade-offs quite a bit, and now I keep all code that is not installed with LabVIEW in a "project" folder. I just copy and paste any re-use code that I need into the project folder. It's not nearly as sophisticated as MGI's package manager, but I mostly develop code by myself so I don't need a very sophisticated solution. My main reason is that if something happens to me at least my co-workers could find the source code repo or the source.zip file I make with each build and have everything they need, instead of wondering where to find the dependencies. If I do find a bug in the re-use code, then I need to update it in every project if it effects that project. User.lib is mostly easier from a maintenance standpoint, and mostly harder from a portability standpoint. If I wanted to make some change to my re-use code that added a feature but broke backward-compatibility, I actually would not want to have to go update old projects to get a feature they don't need.
  3. gregoryj

    Introducing the JKI Flat UI Controls for LabVIEW

    Hi Tomi, I agree that the controls look great. One thing I noticed is that most of the booleans were set to "switch when pressed". I find the latching mechanism is what I use for most of my buttons, and that most users expect the "when released" timing. Were the booleans deliberately set to "switch when pressed"?

Important Information

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