clynch

Hi Rolf,

I was wondering how this was going, as I am trying out 64bit LabVIEW and I ran into the same thing.

Cheers,

Chris

QUOTE(Val Brown @ Nov 15 2007, 09:06 AM)

Of course it is the completely uninformed and rather parochial OPINION of that author that relegates LV to the "backburner".

Yes it is his opinion, but it shared by many in the NXT world. Look at the other link I listed, same message, different delivery.

QUOTE(Justin Goeres @ Nov 15 2007, 09:50 AM)

I agree.

I thought NXT-G would naturally lead the NXT community towards LabVIEW. I don't think that so much anymore. Time will tell.

QUOTE(Aristos Queue @ Nov 15 2007, 04:43 AM)

Any opinions the author has were pretty much discredited in my book by this statement:

(Aside: as I was re-teaching myself how to program in C, I was reminded about the funny logic of computers. -100 is > than -90. Is this true in all languages?)

What the...?! No, negative 100 is not greater than negative 90 in C.

I think discrediting his opinions based on that statement is a mistake. Both articles I referenced communicate what I've observered in the NXT world many times, once you move into discussions about advanced programming of the NXT, LabVIEW rarely even enters the discussion.

If the kids using NXT-G today get transitioned into using something like RobotC for more advanced programming tasks, it will be a shame. And right now, I think that is quite likely.

QUOTE(Michael_Aivaliotis @ Nov 14 2007, 08:32 PM)

Which I've belatedly added to my RSS reader, based on its most awesome content! :thumbup:

Interesting discussions (here and ni week keynote presenter) recently regarding advanced programming of NXT. Too bad LabVIEW is not perceived as a serious contender.

Over on nxtasy.org they have been discussing GPS bluetooth hardware and the NXT. Yesterday, some LabVIEW code was shown to parse GPS data. My first reaction from looking at the block diagram shown was that it looked like C code transferred to G. I know all about this coding style because I used to do that all the time, before I got more comfortable in G. The author also mentioned the solution was inspired by RobotC code and gives his benchmark of 92 milliseconds on the NXT block.

I'm thinking the folks here could come up with some slick and quicker G solutions. It would be a great way to help the NXT community. I'm going to try to look into this more, but I thought I'd mention it here.

Cheers!