Jump to content

gregoryj

Members
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0

About gregoryj

  • Rank
    LAVA groupie

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2016
  • Since
    2010

Recent Profile Visitors

502 profile views
  1. crossposted here: https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/How-do-I-create-a-Candy-Crush-game-in-Labview/m-p/3884161#M1101235
  2. Hi Q, it looks like the admin is named "RTOS", hasn't been active since 2008 though. http://www.wikidot.com/user:info/rtos
  3. 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.
  4. 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"?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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