Jump to content

Antoine Chalons

Members
  • Posts

    859
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    27

Everything posted by Antoine Chalons

  1. VIs from DSC / user management let you check the user/group of currently connected user and based on that you can decide to do anything you wish, refuse keyboard entry, value change on controls, etc... To be clear, I'm not saying you should use the DSC module, I'm simply saying it could be used also to do that. Now... do you already have a licence for it? If not, just implement your own user management. If yes, not too fast, using it requires to understand how it stores the information about the domain (groups/users) etc.
  2. In the past I used the DSC module from NI, it lets you create groups and users in those groups, then in any VI of your project you can hide front panel elements based on groups. There is a palette with a few VIs to list / change users. Pretty handy, and if you change user during execution, automagically LabVIEW handles the rules that you defined. You can't change changes "rules" during execution. DSC module is Windows only. edit : a runtime is needed for deployed EXEs, I'm pretty sure the runtime is free, at least it was in the past.
  3. hey... wait a minute, does this mean that when a class is loaded on host and on RT target, it will be locked, and we'll be stuck with this limitation untill the end of LabVIEW?
  4. It was very nice to have you as an NI insider participating on LAVA, wish you a lot of fun in your new mission.
  5. I think it's called project provider, there is a special interest group on NI Forums I've never fiddled with this but some have, here's a few other links : - https://forums.ni.com/t5/Developer-Center-Resources/Customize-the-LabVIEW-Project-Explorer-Using-the-Project/ta-p/3532774?profile.language=fr - https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Project-Providers/Project-Providers-Documentation/m-p/3492573#M285 -
  6. That doesn't shock me at all. The activity on LAVA is - and has been for quite some time - very low. Edit : ... in quantity of course
  7. I'm one of those. I'm not sure how young lads do their internet search but if you look-up "labview forum" LAVA is in the top 3
  8. Do you do that? In 15 years I only met one LabVIEW Dev who was in a job where management organised pair programming. I'd like to hear feedback from people who do that 🧐
  9. Is NI sharing public information to support this statement? LAVA might not be a good indicator of LV's user base mood, but I find it hard to be confident/positive about LabVIEW's future - and I'm trying hard because I do love LabVIEW.
  10. I think it’s a pattern at NI, only scratching the surface. lots of products or support for standards are superficial. They exhort us to engineer ambitiously because they don’t.
  11. For that kind of Ui elements property management I use the QControls toolkit (homepage, download link) I've never really looked at the property browser, so I'm not sure if it could help.
  12. Maybe you can still find the openg commander on sourceforge No idea if it supports Linux but I believe it's open source
  13. Yep, I remember when Tim Dehne left NI, rumor I heard at the time was he wanted to become CEO and understood he would never make it, then left. Indeed it took a long time for Dr T to retire. But hey, pretty sure the rumor was not the full story, so many VPs were competing for that.
  14. If I remember well, windows 10 iot was the default option with the industrial computer from Advantech, at least that's what the reseller told me. We ordered one to try (with a return option if it didn't work), we tested for a few days, we were happy. We were only interested in in having something that worked like windows 10, came pre-installed and didn't have all the media/game nonsense that comes on "normal" computers.
  15. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that he started from the erdosmiller TOML library Edit : I knew :
  16. A CAR already existed : 1103060 R&D is planning to fix it in LV 2022. Recommended work-around is a mass compile after installing any new version / patch.
  17. On Windows 10, I had LV 2020 SP1 32-bit working fine I installed the f1 patch using NIPM Then this : I noticed because these VIs are use by the File Checksum VI It's not too difficult to fix, see this video I made :
  18. Yeah... bit cryptic this comment, please elaborate.
  19. I'm quite sure the answer is yes. Are you having issues with this?
  20. Indeed, Advantech offers Win 10 IoT Enterprise. If you take a look at this product : https://advdownload.advantech.com/productfile/PIS/AIMB-587/file/AIMB-587_DS(082721)20210827160444.pdf This is the equivalent up-to-date version of what I was using, it does mention Win 10 IoT Ent (not sure about the difference HL and VL though.
  21. Never had any issue with LabVIEW on windows 10 iot I changed job 3 years ago, I don't do vision anymore, that's why I said I used to use Advantech, I never had problems with IPC-720.
  22. Well "good option" is a bit broad... it was great for my application There production line was producing 60 part par minute There were 3 C-Link camera, therefore 2 PCIe-1430 frmaegrabbers Each cam was acquiring 10 images of each part The time available for image acquisition + processing was ~800ms so the acquisition was done in parallel to the processing for each camera. At the time (3 years ago almost) we were getting the most powerfull IPC-720 available with 32Gb of RAM and Windows 10 IOT. The application did not require fanless or RT and it was working 24/7. We also had similar application with GigE cameras but I never liked GigE.
  23. Indeed the IC line of product was supposed to stand between the cRIO and PXI in term of perf - without offering the modularity that cRIO and PXI offer of course, but for Vision application it was ok with usb3 and GigE. But even then, the perf was disappointing for heavy vision application. I use to use Advantech IPC range, updated every 6 month with new CPUs etc. Supporting 3rd party hardware with NI Linux RT would probably require a huge effort for NI, not sure they're ready for that. And where NI is disappointing me a bit more is by not telling us what their plan is for Hardware between cRIO and PXI, at least if they were to say they are only going to maintain cRIO and PXI in the future at least we'd stop hopping a find a different solution.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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