Barrie

A track I never thought got the recognition it deserved was "Skateaway" from Making Movies. Awesome!

This is terribly unscientific but I have found that a VI that doesn't draw right, doesn't run right. I have abandoned approaches just because it doesn't look right and its rarely failed me. Its an aesthetic or gestalt thing. A very simple example is that my VIs run best when the dataflow is left to right, top to bottom, like a well drawn schematic. Call it, if you will, another example of "Thinking In G" So, I guess the question is; can aesthetics be quantified? VI Analyzer is a good start, but perhaps what you are asking is verging on AI. Please don't take this as discouragement, just a discussion point. Cheers, Barrie

Brain dead? Yes. Unusual? No so much. This site is good for a few chuckles or at least vicarious comiseration. B.

I don't know if this should be in the Rube Goldberg section but it is implemented with NXT. It gives Fieldpoint a run for its money. Enjoy. B.

Ok, now I'm really torqued. I tried exactly that about a week ago and I am 99% sure it did not revert. I just tried it again, and it did revert. :headbang: As you pointed out, if the 2nd level unbundle names are unique, it does not revert. That said, if I go back to the original scripting test VI and make the element names unique, it still doesn't work. Any suggestions for tracking down this elusive secret? Incense, chants, incantations or aligning the cpu with magnetic north will all be considered. B.

Perhaps, but I would be happy if I could just control the polarity and magnitude of the fourth dimension, it would give me more time to study, well..... and of course other important things, like :beer: .

Thanks Aristos and others: This "leg-up" prompted me to dig deeper into these structures and I must confess that my original question was an RTFM. The differences are not as subtle or obscure as I first thought. Call it laziness or fear of the unknown. I am using various versions of GPS receivers that are wildly different in their protocol (and data content :headbang: ) so selectively including drivers programatically will reduce the code size by quite a bit, but would lock me into a device-specific build. One thing that is not explicitly stated (or I couldn't find); I am assuming that any code that is logically eliminated from executing is eliminated from a build, based on the target system and user defined symbols but this will only occur when the diagram is removed. I am futher assuming that this feature would not be appropriate for selecting features or functions at run-time in an .exe. Is this correct? In other words, are these features best used to control code size, execution speed or both? Any insight into the internal mechanics would be welcomed. In the bigger picture, I don't think the full capabilities of the Project are appreciated without a lot of digging, but perhaps I am just futher exposing my laziness . Does one maintain one project and then manage the symbols and build specifications for platform or device specifics, or does one create a different project for each build? It seems to me that this question starts to merge into SCC issues and is perhaps outside the scope of a LV discussion. Further (at the risk of rambling) how many of you out there are full adopters of the project paradigm? - Do you always create a project, even when you are just trying out new ideas? - Are you converting older projects to .lvproj? - Does anyone use SCC in a single user environment for automatic archiving? I am always trying to improve my software skills so all opinions and philosophies are welcome. Cheers, B.

I've been using LV for more than a week or two but I must confess I am having some diffculty getting my head around some new features. The behaviour of the standard case structure has been compiler optimized to discard any code eliminated by a constant. Cool. So now we also have conditional disable and diagram disable. With the changes in the case structure behaviour the differences are, to me. subtle. Apart from the search function which allows me to find unique structures (and presumably delete them prior to a build), I don't have a solid understanding of where, when, or why I would use the two new features. Anyone care to enlighten me? What am I missing? Cheers, Barrie

This is really bugging me. :headbang: The timing is such that I was just about to start on a sub VI that needs to do exactly this. I'm not sure if I ever got the sample VI to work, so, not calling anyone a liar, can someone confirm that it did work consistently, at least for a while? if so, I can start working backwards to try to figure out what's going wrong. any other clues would be greatly appreciated. (Fresh copy of LabVIEW, window minimized, first run only etc.) It appears a reference is getting trashed, or some data is non-persistent, but that should create an error. The only way I have been able to do this reliably, is really clunky. I create a tree of unbundles to get the item I want and then I wire the final unbundle to the original cluster and delete the intermediate unbundles. Not for the faint of heart. I agree, no feedback (error) for non-existent items is a real pain. As for a bug report, I remember Jeff K. saying something about "It's ok to use scripting, just don't expect us to support it", so that's a non starter. Scripting: The final Frontier.

Reminds me of an old bumper sticker that was near and dear to my heart: "Support your local musicians, blow up a disco." B.

Thanks for asking, and NO I don't. Particularly when I have 7.1.1 and 8.20 open at the same time. B.

Can't confirm for sure but you're probably right. I have the DSC package and symfac is installed. B.

Gee, I thought everyone had the OGTK ! Good point actually. :thumbup: Here is the full .llb (with some diagram clean-up) Cheers, Barrie Download File:post-658-1162506452.llb

Hello All: Rather than use trial and error to find what the terminal indices are, (and to explore scripting) I wrote this little utility. Feel free to suggest any corrections or additions. Cheers, Barrie Oh, and thanks to Chris Davis for the "leg up" that got me this far. B. Download File:post-658-1162432064.llb