Jump to content

bgapske

Members
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1

About bgapske

  • Rank
    LAVA groupie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Michigan

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2009
  • Since
    1999
  1. We have suffered similar issues with our plugin-based application using packed project libraries. Any time we loaded more than one packed library that called the same "inlined" VI (say for instance, a VI in our reuse library) as another loaded packed library, it would break with a similar message. Individually they loaded fine. In the end we just turned off the inline feature on the reuse code and all was well. We haven't yet got around to thoroughly investigating and reporting the issue, but I might suggest experimenting with removing the inline settings and trying again.
  2. I'm not sure. Apparently the .licx file just tells the visual studio compiler to use some sort of license compiler when building an application. The compiled application then includes information which enable certain components to determine if the calling application is licensed to use them. My first attempt at contacting NI support resulted in me hearing the crickets chirping...though it looks like some of the measurement studio products use this same technology. Hopefully they will find the right person to talk to and get back to me with good news...
  3. I'm curious if anyone has had any luck calling 3rd party .net code from LabVIEW that requires a licenses.licx file to be "embedded" into your executable (or else the 3rd party code will complain that it is not licensed.) Apparently this is a common scheme for people using visual studio. I have a feeling that I may be out of luck here...
  4. A couple of my recent projects involve a number of RT targets and a central Host (or another RT target) I tend to prefer basic TCP for a couple reasons. Mostly because my RT targets have been pretty taxed when it comes to computing resources, and with TCP you can get high throughput with little overhead. (and you don't have to install the services that support shared variables,remote panels, web services, etc if you don't use them) One of my systems works similar to an example in the NI Simple Messaging Reference Library. I have the RT target acting as the “server” and listening for connecti
  5. As Mellroth already suggested, I would certainly remove the call to configure the FIFO from the loop. According to the LabVIEW Help: "Before the new depth is set, LabVIEW empties all data from the host memory and FPGA FIFO." It doesn't specify whether the method checks that the new depth is different than the current programmed depth, but i wouldn't risk it... -Brian
  6. Who is this "0bama" guy you keep referring to?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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