Jump to content

Antoine Chalons

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Antoine Chalons last won the day on April 16

Antoine Chalons had the most liked content!

Community Reputation


About Antoine Chalons

  • Rank
    The 500 club
  • Birthday September 10

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Lausanne Area

LabVIEW Information

  • Version
    LabVIEW 2019
  • Since

Contact Methods

Recent Profile Visitors

8,525 profile views
  1. I've had some difficult clients in the past but it never got to that point 🤣
  2. I've fixed quite a few bugs and changed the way timestamps are handled, now using JDP Science Common VIs for RFC-3339 You can follow on GitHub
  3. I haven't checked how he handled comments. I started thinking about variant attributes to handle them (text and position) but it quickly gets tricky so for now I've accepted to either only read or lose comments.
  4. Oh, and by the way, the VIP is now available on vipm.io : https://www.vipm.io/package/lv_toml/
  5. Let me make sure I understand what you mean by this : You mean, they are ignored and don't mess up with extracting the data, right? (appart from the case in issue #1) Because for me one thing that is a bit annoying is if you load data from a TOML file that has some comments, as soon as you write using this lib, you lose all the comments, or am I missing something?
  6. Just released v2.0.0 There's not a lot in it really, I'm hopping that the effort in improving the error reporting will help future developments like adding support for new data types and comments.
  7. I've been thinking about this but as I said above, this a not a short term need for me. I do hope I'll find some me-time to play with comments during the summer. Interestingly, there is a reported issue on the original repo that is linked to comments : https://github.com/erdosmiller/lv-toml/issues/1
  8. Ah.. I knew I'd screw-up the license handling... I have to say I didn't even look up how to handle open source license when forking. My bad, will fix that soon.
  9. Timestamp support is not on my roadmap (yet) but I'll keep that in mind, thanks!
  10. Thanks a lot for the clarification. I'll fix this in my fork.
  11. @bjusticeI've seen issue #2 that you created on the original repo, I have to say I don't understand the problem nor the suggested solution. Could you post more info about this please?
  12. I'm going to fork the repo on GitHub and work on it for my needs, What I'm planning to do is : short term : - move to LV2017 (just because it's the oldest I have already available on a VM) - add support for path - improve error reporting hopefully one day : - add support for comments At this point, I'm not planning to do any major refactoring. If anyone wants to participate... feel free : https://github.com/AntoineChalons/lv-toml
  13. Well that's my case as well, and it worked with my (what we use to call) DSRL license number. As for uploading files, I created a srq last week and could upload files. Maybe things have changed since. If I go to my existing SRQs I can still upload files, I just tried, it worked. What I'm suspecting is that based on your account (partner / not partner / company, etc..) NI filters and gives you a different feature set for creating your SRQ, that wouldn't shock me.
  14. I can confirm, it expects you LabVIEW License number. I've recently created a few SRQ via ni.com/ask The interface and the process have changed a bit, but I could describe my issue and attach files (max report amd a zip containing code).
  15. This is great! Just in case we are thousands of LV users silently wishing for native TOML support : https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Add-native-support-for-TOML-file-format/idi-p/4136157
  • Create New...

Important Information

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