Neil Pate

I still don't really get this. I want to see the branches when I look in the past. If the branch on the remote is deleted then I lose a bit of the story of how the code got to that state don't I?

It's been a while but when using the NI Modbus library I found there was some weirdness regarding what the base of the system is. This might just be my misunderstanding of Modbus but for example to read a holding register that was at address 40001 I would actually need to use the Read Holding Register VI with an address of 1 (or 0). This snippet works fine for reading multiple registers, but see the VI I had to write on the left to do the register address translation.

So I am pretty new to GitHub and pull requests (I still am not sure I 100% understand the concept of local and remotes having totally different branches either!) But what is this all about? I have done a bit of digging and it seems the current best practice is indeed to delete the branch when it is no longer needed. This is also a totally strange concept to me. I presume the branch they are talking about here is the remote branch? Confused...

NI: "Engineer Ambitiously" "Change some fonts and colours, that will shut up the filthy unwashed masses who are not Fortune 500 companies"

So I am not a Modbus expert, but have definitely written information to a PLC in the past. As far as I know you cannot write to input registers, I presume you can write to output registers (are they called coils?). I don't have the toolkits installed on my PC right now so I cannot check. This code below works fine for setting Holding Registers. Have you tried writing to the Holding Registers? I

I do agree with you, but must confess that at least once in my dark past I have coloured a block diagram. It was a VI I hated and wanted to get rid of so I coloured the background an awful red colour to remind me every time I opened it.

I cannot recall doing this with a LOGO! but have done it quite a bit with plain old S7s. The Modbus module (now open source) works just fine. What difficulties are you having?

Just to chip in here, I recall hearing that NI is going to be moving away from the regular biannual releases of LabVIEW. I cannot remember where I heard or read this though.

Have you tried to mass compile?

Nice article also, part 1 of 7! https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/01/the-curious-observers-guide-to-quantum-mechanics/

Are you sure you burned the correct amount of sage during the incantation?

I think the NXG team was outsourced to a C# dev house outside of the US. I suspect the contract has been terminated.

Maybe 2021 will be the year of Linux on the desktop, but given that this has been predicted every year since about 2003 I would not hold my breath. LabVIEW will never be open source. It would not make sense, nobody outside of NI would be able to maintain it. LabVIEW is not the Linux kernel which is of huge interest to millions of others. The area of the intersection on the Venn diagram of skilled enthusiastic LabVIEW developers, ultra-skilled C++ developers, and those with enough spare time is approximately zero. The full complement of engineers at NI can barely make any progress into the

Another option is Alice. It combines a 3D environment with a language quite similar to some of the others mentioned. It can be fun for younger kids as they can ignore the programming bit and just construct a 3D scene with some props quite easily.

Dear Santa NI I am now in my 40s with youngish kids, so despite the fact that all I got for Christmas this year was a Pickle Rick cushion I am not actually complaining. However, I would like to get my order in to the Elves as early as possible. This is my wishlist, in no particular order. I expect this list will not be to everyone's taste, this is ok, this is just my opinion. Make LabVIEW free forever. The war is over, Python has won. If you want to be relevant in 5 to 10 years you need to embrace this. The community edition is a great start but is is probably not enough. Note: I