dannyt

QUOTE(TG @ Jul 26 2007, 06:54 PM) I found I could be a little LabVIEW with the 3M one but as they only do a right handed one and I am left handed it is not really a fair test. It was VERY comfortable to hold and move, much more so than the Evoluent. Danny

QUOTE(tcplomp @ Jul 30 2007, 11:02 AM) Quite so, thank you for that Ton

Hi, The Lava portal page is one of my FireFox tabs I look at on a regular basis, this morning, on fireing up FireFox the portal page is no longer scaling correctly. The centre news items seem fully extended pushing the right hand "Latest Topic Replies" etc way of the page to the right. So I have to scroll over to see it, not a major quibble for such a great site, just though you might like to know. Runnig FireFox 2.0.0.5 Danny

QUOTE(yen @ Jul 26 2007, 07:39 PM) Thank's very much Yen, I will have a play with that next week when I get back to work Danny

HI, Maybe this is an old wish, if so I have missed it but ....... I really wish there was a better way to see the "This VI's Callers" and the "This VI's SubVI's" panel rather than having to go view --> Browse Releationships -> "This VI's Callers" and hol;ding the mouse there. It would be really good to be able to PIN the two menu panels and even better if once pined they automatically updated to be correct for a VI front panel or block diagram you clicked on. I can never remember the list of VI's calling the VI I am working on and keep having to check. You can sort of get the feature I want by opening the VI Heirarchy on the top level VI of your project and when going to edit a VI lower down update the VI heirachy but it is a little cluncky, the details shown by the "This VI's Callers" and the "This VI's SubVI's" give exactly what I want and how I want it I just do not want it to disapear when I move my mouse back to the block diagram to continue working. Danny

QUOTE(PaulG. @ Jul 25 2007, 02:58 PM) Paul thanks very much for that link, I have not stumbled across that guide and it look well work a read. Danny

Hi, I have been having trouble recently and have been playing with a number of options. Believe me this is a double problem if you happen to be left handed as very few decent mice are offered in Left Handed variants. I am currently using a Left Handed version of the Evoluent mouse in my left hand, when I started using it there was much improvement, but as time goes on it seems to be less effective. I think the only way I can really help my left hand is by not using it so much so in the last few weeks I have AT THE SAME TIME added a Right Handed Logitech TrackMan Wheel mouse and I am trying to force myself to switch between the two options. This option is working quite well and I have surprised myself with what I can do with my right hand. I still cannot use it for actual LabVIEW wiring , but I now do most of my Web surfing and general desktop stuff with the trackball. One mouse I tried and I really liked was the 3M mouse show below, the only problem for me was they only do a right handed version and in the end I bought the left handed Evoluent instead something I am beginning to regret. http://forums.lavag.org/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=6460http://forums.lavag.org/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=6459 cheers Danny

I know where you are coming from, I have been doing LabVIEW now for 6 or 7 months and I still look at code I have done and think, is that really the best way to do it ? and certainly there must be a better way to lay it out. I actually thing LabVIEW is a hard language to learn in that respect, to make the transition from being able to write something that works and something that is efficient and a pleasure to look at, unless you are lucky enough to work with a existing pro who can guide your hand. I am a lot better now than I was after just doing it for two months, but I still have a long way to go. I think it is a matter of practise make improvements. I have picked up a lot from the LAVA forums and looking at examples and I would recommend two books that I have found very useful The LabVIEW Style Bookby Peter A.President, Bloomy Controls, Inc. Blume - President, Bloomy Controls, Inc.Publisher: Prentice HallPub Date: February 27, 2007Print ISBN-10: 0-13-145835-3Print ISBN-13: 978-0-13-145835-2Pages: 400Slots: 2.0 http://safari.oreilly.com/0131458353 and LabVIEW for Everyone: Graphical Programming Made Easy and Fun, Third Editionby Jeffrey Travis, Jim KringPublisher: Prentice HallPub Date: July 27, 2006Print ISBN-10: 0-13-185672-3Print ISBN-13: 978-0-13-185672-1Pages: 1032Slots: 2.0

We have written a set of local wrapper VI's around the standard VISA communication VI's. These VI's are to provide a standard way of logging in VISA read and writes plus a way of handling a device online (available) / offline (unavailable) functionality. The core of these wrappers is a VI (shown below in visa_connections.vi) that holds some shift registers which contain all information we are interested in, for all the VISA devices used in our test system - Instrument name (this is the name WE refer to the instrument by) - VISA Resource Name - Online? - Driver I see two methods of getting this information into our Visa-read and write VI's where they are needed; I would be grateful for any views about the efficiency of these two method and any general comments about these techniques Method One : We would call visa_connections with the instrument name, run the open case shown below and pass all the required info out using the Visa Data Cluster this cluster is then chained into our read & write wrappers so they have all the information they require. Methods Two: Instead of creating the Visa Data Cluster, as in the open case below, I just pass out the VISA Resource Name name and chain this into my read & write VI's. In this case I would then need to make a call in each sub-vi back to the visa_connection.vi to lookup up any extra information required. A typical situation of using this would be a visa query, with method one, I call visa_connections.vi once pass the VIsa Data Cluster forward to a write then a read, because of the cluster I am using more memory then if I just pass the reference alone. But if I use the visa reference only method I would need to two extra calls to visa_connections.vi (one in read, one in write) to get the online? and instrument name info. So is it better to pass around all the information needed in a cluster or is it better to make extra VI calls and get it when needed. My own timing test seem to show it is better to pass round all the needed information. I hope this makes some sense cheers Dannyt http://forums.lavag.org/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=6014

QUOTE(Jim Kring @ May 17 2007, 09:43 PM) That sound to me like something one would get up in their spare time :ninja: . So where is this place to lick salt ? anywhere near Torquay ? http://local.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&ss=yp.yp&cp=50.519866~-3.714237&style=h&lvl=12&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=11583082&encType=1' target="_blank">http ://local.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&amp...&encType=1

View from a newbi QUOTE(mballa @ Mar 17 2006, 05:28 AM) I very much like the two comments above, as a newbie it would give a realistic guide to me if I am to find the right type of level for the LAVA forums. I am however finding this whole issue very unnerving as a newbie, when I can across LAVA at first I was very keen and interested, it felt an open and friendly site, I WANTED TO be involved. However over the last week, with all that has been going on, I have been looking at the post (not many) I have made, thinking were they suitable and valid; should I really be on LAVA at all. There is a risk that a lot of newbies will be put of posting and getting involved, the site will end up with a large number of members most of whom only ever look and do not take part, I think in the long run that will make it a less interesting place both both the newbies and the long term members. In my experience it can sometimes be the most seemingly stupid of question, that generates some of the deepest and interesting of discussions. I would like to say to Michael many thanks for providing this great site. I would also like to thank all the regular expert contributors who make it so great. cheers Danny

Please note this is a cross-post to the NI discussion forums (where I got no reply) Hi All, With all the recent talk about standards of postings I am now feeling a little nervous about posting on Lava . But after due consideration I feel this is a valid post and after all LAVA needs people to post stuff to have a reason to exist. I was surprised this raised no interest on the NI Boards, as I still do not think it a total stupid or irrelevant topic. My interest in this question was re-awakened by a response to an of topic question (by me) in the thread My First LVOOP Project . This was to do with my 'incorrect' expectation that by moving to a LVOOP Class based architecture, there would be a significant reduction in the number of VI recompiles by decoupling large amounts of the code. I am interested in getting a better understanding of what type of changes to a VI, cause higher level VI's to recompile ? and what is the best approach to minimise this situation. I understand the obvious changes, i.e adding / removing a front panel control or indicator, or the changing an indicator / control type and I can see how that will cause the calling VI to need to be recompiled. However sometimes I do changes that I would not expect to affect the calling VI but still it recompiles. The particular thing I do not understand is the rules I should use to decide when to expect the ripple effect, whereby I change a sub-VI and not only does it's calling VI recompile but there is a ripple effect up the calling Hierarchy and often not for any reason that seems obvious or predicable to me. Following on from the above, what can I do the forestall the ripple like compile situation, in particular Is it affected by the project directory structure and the stored locations of VI's releative to each other, for what I have do so far this appears to have no effect. I assume one of the best techniques to forestall this is to us a plug-in / dynamic loading of VI's type architecture. I had hoped that by moving to a LVOOP type architecture would reduce this but following a posting on the LAVA site I now believe that the effect would be the opposite. See link above. cheers Dannyt Working in LabView 7.0 on Windows XP.

QUOTE(Tomi Maila @ Apr 26 2007, 10:28 AM) Tomi Separate source and binary would make such a huge difference to how LabView could be used with most source control systems, I think the archive form would still give problems and it would be better for just the two to exist at the same level. For example it is easy for CVS or Clearcase to deal with individual files like VI's but they cannot deal well with VI's within a LLB contect (though I supspect one could plug in window explorer LLB reading in Clearcase file type manager). <example> My Documents\My Project\My Project.lvprj (XML where each item links to both .vis and .vi) My Documents\My Project\A.vis (XML file with VI source only) My Documents\My Project\B.vis (XML file with VI source only) My Documents\My Project\A.vi (binary) My Documents\My Project\B.vi (binary) A change to "A" would result in a new copy of A.vis and A.vi can happily effect B.vi is "B" depends on A but B.vis would not change. </example> However I suspect this is living in a dream world. so I will keep quite now Danny

QUOTE(Tomi Maila @ Apr 25 2007, 01:45 PM) Thank you for that information, I find that very very disappointing. I am now not so sure that I am as keen in trying to persuade people here to move to LabView 8.2.1 and try out the LVOOP way of doing things (though 8.21 would still be generally a good thing). I suspect I would just get a lot of grief from my co-workers. I do hope this is something that will change as LVOOP develops. For now I suspect this is a more play with at home option. Dannyt

Hi Tomi, Though I am not using LVOOP at presents (Still running Labview 7.0), I have been reading your Blog's with interest. QUOTE(Tomi Maila @ Apr 24 2007, 05:55 PM) This issue is one I find really annoying as somebody relatively new to LabView, the fact that VI's are in effect both the source code and the object and I am often surprised by some of the things that can cause other VI's to have to change . I use ClearCase as our source control system and I have just come to terms (well almost ... one day) with the fact that I often have to 'Checkout' save a 'Checkin' a number of VI's other than the one I was really interested in. However ...... One of the big benefits I would have hope for, and expected, with moving to a LVOOP Class based architecture, would be a significant reduction in this particular problem by decoupling large amounts of the code. I was sort of hoping that if the public interface VI's of the class are left alone (as much as possible) the recompiles of VI's in the private implementation part of the class, would be limited to a greater extent to with-in the class. I wonder if this was your experience. It may well be I do not full or correctly understand the extent of the recompile issues. cheers Dannyt

HI, This is just a warning for anybody on the forums who happens to use the Free version of the Zone Alarm Firewall. I just want to help you avoid what might be several hours of unwanted work. I have been using this product at home for quite a while and have recommended it to various friends and family and I have generally been very impressed with it...... However the latest update version 7.0.337.000 has a serious bug in it, --------------- Some users of free ZoneAlarm have inadvertently had Anti-spam enabled. This can cause interference with Outlook and Outlook Express, or possibly with Outlook crashes. See the Zone Alarm Forums http ://forums.zonealarm.com/zonelabs/board...p;message.id=1 ------------- There is a fix on the forums above. I only found out about it after my father-in-law's Zone Alarm automatically updated and he "lost" all his email and email account :headbang: and as usual in this situation phoned me . It tool me quite a while to sort it all out over the phone (no he had stopped doing the back-ups thingy I keep telling him about). On my own machine I upgrade zonealarm ran the zone alarm link before I started up Outlook that seemed OK cheers Dannyt

I though to heck with the cost and I am eagerly awating my copies of Labview Adv Prog Tech 2 Ed Labview for Everyone: Graphical Programming Made Easy and Fun The Labview Style Book (National Instruments Virtual Instrumentation) Hopefully this time next year I might know something

Hi, I am trying to decided which Labview Books or Books to splash some of my hard earned cash on. I am after something mid-level to advanced and I want to ensure that it covers Labview 8.0(8.2 would be nice). Can anyone give me their views on any of the books below or and other I may have missed. It might be a good idea to have a Labview Book / Books review section in the Wiki. Even if reviews are not put there we could have a synopsis and as some have been written by regular contributors to LAVA at least things like what Labview version different editions of books cover, would be correct, something hard to tell from Amazon.co.uk Having looked on the web, my short list at present is (not in any particular order) Labview Adv Prog Tech 2 Ed - Bitter Richard; 2Rev Ed edition (29 Sep 2006) I cannot really find much out about this book, I assume it covers Labview 8.0 as the 2nd edition was published 2006 but I do not know for sure and the only blurb I can find suggest it only goes to Labview 7.0 Labview for Everyone: Graphical Programming Made Easy and Fun Third Edition- James Kring; On Amazon.co.uk, it sais Synopsis This is the No. 1 step-by-step guide to Labview - now completely updated for Labview 8! ........ From The Back Cover The #1 step-by-step guide to Labview—now completely updated for Labview 6i. help ?? The Labview Style Book (National Instruments Virtual Instrumentation) - Daniel J. Inman; I have seen comments about this book in the Lava forums. http://forums.lavag.org/Blog-Thinking-in-G...st=0#entry26809 It looks very interesting (shame it is £60 +) Labview Graphical Programming - Gary W. Johnson; 4Rev Ed edition (1 Aug 2006) I cannot really find out anything useful regard this book at all cheers As always when looking between Amazon.com and Amazon.co.uk one would never guess what the current exchange rate £ to $ really is. danny

Hi Can I make sure I am not missing the point in all this. If I understand this correctly the term "In-lining" is NOT failing to splitting your project into sub-vi's and thus abandon your project organisation and good partitioning of code for readability and understanding, but is instead a term for merging your project into one huge Vi at build time to a) improve the programs efficiency and b) significantly improve its security. If you did do this I assume using the remote debug facility would be next to impossible on your one huge VI. How much of an issue do people see this two issue of efficiency and security just as a matter of interest ? Finally if instead of releasing an executable you release the actual project, I suspect this would not be the way to go. cheers Dannyt

QUOTE(Jim Kring @ Feb 18 2007, 10:11 PM) Jim and Mike, I am more than happy to take on board your comment that Labview scales well, I did say in my post QUOTE(dannyt @ Feb 15 2007, 09:32 AM) This option may be due to my limited exposure to Labview plus I am still working with Labview 7.0. I do think that thinks look so much better post version 8 of Labview with the introduction of Projects, better configuration control and much more. I am currently writing my own ClearCase handling VI's as version 7 has no concept of it. The project I am working on has over 900 Vi's it works and does what it is supposed to do, we are therefore in a keep it going situation with minimum change. The problem is it gets harder and harder to keep it going and introduce newer features and small change can cause the re-linking of nearly all the VI's in the project. I would love the opportunity to break it apart into a more modular system, dynamically loading tests for example. I do think that maybe Mike has hit the nail on the head with his comments on Ad Hoc software development, which in truth can happen in any Software Language. My final comment is to Jim, if there is one application I have seen that leads me to believe that Labview projects can be scaled it must be the VI Package Manager, it gives me a feeling of well thought out, planned and executed piece of work, better I feel than some of the actual part of Labview itself. :worship: . I am sure that something like this can only be created by applying a structure software engineering approch. cheers danny

Thanks to everyone for the replies..... for now I will use the 'Match First String' solution, I like that. But I have an evaluation copy of Labview 8.2 and oh the Match Regular expression function is sooo nice :thumbup: , there are so many places in our code where this would simplify life cheers dannyt

QUOTE(tomstickland @ Feb 15 2007, 12:12 AM) I think this can cut both ways; I have, very occasionally, worked with electrical and mechanical engineer's, who could not give a damn about how the software works or any of its implemention issues. they refuse to consider any other group in there design. So I do think it is more down to the individuals in question, there are always people who will not look beyond what is their 'area'. (Generalization now) Having worked in both the telecoms and financial sectors, there is obviously a difference in the peoples experience, software engineers working in telecoms sector are, on the whole, daily dealing with projects that involve directly with hardware and issues that electrical and mechanical engineers would be more familiar with, in this area the software is often, only part of the product or is even only testing the product. In the financial sector the software tends to be the product and the focus is very different. There does have to be a paragin shift when you now from one sector to the other. QUOTE(tomstickland @ Feb 15 2007, 12:12 AM) They also used the following words which I have never used myself: core system architecture, class diagram, use case model. This is a little hard to take as you have just been complaining (quite rightly) about the software engineer being narrow minded, surly you are doing the same with this comment. :headbang: You have hired a software engineer to utilise his expertise in software and then you do not want him to use best practise in his work, yes he should be interested in the 'whole system' and areas outside his software area, but that does NOT mean he should just ignore and throw any what training and experience he has. I do not mind when the RF engineers I work with go on for hours about 'coupling' and 'interference', or who mechanical engineers spend their lunch time rabbiting on about 'form fit' or their screw-fix catalogue . QUOTE(tomstickland @ Feb 15 2007, 12:12 AM) Do you think that Labview users would tend to be more hardware/practical system solution orientated? I agree with all the was said by Aristos, in particular the point QUOTE(Aristos Queue @ Feb 15 2007, 07:18 AM) generally when the software reaches a particular size and/or needs to be handed off to a new programmer or becomes a team project -- where ad hoc just isn't enough. This is where the software engineering terms and the focus on 'the software' start to become more and more important. I know software engineers who put their hand to mechanical design and have designs items that have ended up with customers, but I would not like to drive over a bridge build by a software engineer. As the size and scope of any project grows the attention to detail and best practice becomes more and more important. The one area I find Labview to be really really poor, is the scaling up to large projects being worked on my multiple programmers, where software auditing \ tractability and reuse are key and I believe this is due to the history of Labview being a "non-programmers" programming language. This option may be due to my limited exposure to Labview plus I am still working with Labview 7.0. There does seem to have been quite a few improvements to this situation in the newer versions of Labview with the introduction of software projects, better software configuration control and other items, but they have been a VERY long time coming considering how long Labview has been around.

QUOTE(JFM @ Feb 13 2007, 12:27 PM) JFM, Thanks :thumbup: for the Match First String suggestion, that's a nice way of doing this, I had not used this before. Examples are MTY2345 MAF2345 PTC2345 CVS2345 as you say I can use the match first string to match MTY MAF PTC and CVS build into an array and then just check the number at the end, this is a great deal nicer than what I was planning to do. cheers danny

QUOTE(Tomi Maila @ Feb 13 2007, 12:02 PM) ah Labview 8.0 or even better 8.2, I am trying to go in that direction, but you know the old Newtonian law on Software Inertia... a software version bought and paid for should remain in rest until senior management say otherwise As I said I can implement it in 7.0, I was just hoping somebody would tell me I was wrong and there was a way to match it with one single MatchPattern vi if only i got the pattern right.

Hi, I wonder if anyone could help please help me improve my labview with regard regular expressions. I am checking serial / part numbers entered on a front panel by operator; when the operator presses enter I do a little check to see if a valid part number has been entred. This is currently implemented and working I am using a matchsub-string vi but the pattern match is far to general and I would like to tighten it. For example I would like to match MTY2345 MAF2345 PTC2345 CVS2345 in perl or python there is a | (pipe) option that can be used so (MTY | MAF | PTC | CVS )2345 would work fine, it appears there is no pipe in the labview regular expressions. I can see a way to implement this using multiple matchsub-string vi's each using the output of the previous one, but I feel if only i could get the correct pattern I could do it with only one matchsub-string vi. I am using Labview version 7.0 cheers in advance dannyt