Jump to content

Phillip Brooks

Members
  • Posts

    899
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    50

Posts posted by Phillip Brooks

  1. I started playing around with DropBox before Thanksgiving. While I was at my parent's house over Christmas, I scanned some old family photos and uploaded them them via the DropBox web interface to my 'drop box'. I had already configured my home computer to mount DropBox in the "My Documents" folder and my wife asked me how I found time load the pictures into the computer when we got home :P

    It's a very simple interface, and offers 2 GB storage for free. I haven't experimented with it yet, but they also support revisions for files. It is available for Windows, Mac and Linux.

    http://www.getdropbox.com

    I learned about DropBox from this blog.

  2. I started playing around with DropBox before Thanksgiving. While I was at my parent's house, I scanned some old family photos and uploaded them them via the web interface to my 'drop box'. I configured my home computer to mount DropBox in the "My Documents" folder and my wife asked me how I found time load the pictures into the computer when we got home :P

    It's a very simple interface, and offers 2 GB storage for free. I haven't experimented with it yet, but they also support revisions for files. It is available for Windows, Mac and Linux, and

    http://www.getdropbox.com

  3. QUOTE (alfa @ Jan 3 2009, 03:39 AM)

    In my view those who are eating meat are half-cannibals.

    What did one cannibal say to the other while dining upon a clown?

    "Does this taste funny to you?"

    Ba-dum-tsh!

  4. QUOTE (alfa @ Jan 3 2009, 03:39 AM)

    In my view those who are eating meat are half-cannibals.

    What did one cannibal say to the other while dining upon a clown?

    "Does this taste funny to you?"

    Ba-dum-tsh!

  5. I have a <user.lib> LLB that's about ten years old. It's been updated and recompiled without problems for all these years.

    During analysis for an upgrade (from LV 7.0/TS 3.0 to LV 8.6/TS 4.1.1), I discovered that several of the VIs contained in this LLB use non-standard names (contain /\<>? characters). TestStand 4.1 would go into an endless loop and hang when trying to load a step pointing to a VI in an LLB with a non-standard OS name. This was reported to NI, and is fixed in TestStand 4.1.1.

    I'm concerned about leaving these oddly named files 'as is'. I've read a few problems/rants on the NI forums with respect to NI's use of these non-standard naming conventions in LLBs, and have a fear (probably unnecessary) that support for the LLB may be dropped in a future version.

    So....

    I can rename the VIs. All calling VIs will break, and all TestStand sequences will error when run.

    My sequence files are stored as INI text files, so I can perform a simple 'search and replace' to fix the calls.

    How can I programmatically replace calls to these sub-vis from within a vi? I've been poking around in the 'optional' App methods and properties, but haven't found much. The only promising thing was Linker:Read Info and Linker:Write Info.

    I renamed one of the offending VIs. I used Linker:Read Info and was able to evaluate a VI that calls the renamed VI. It appears that the Path and delimited name are the same for a VI that cannot be found.

    I know what the old name and new name will be, and they will have the same path. I plan to leave the renamed files inside an LLB for now, and if the LLB construct goes away or I want to start using source control, I will use the LLB Manager to convert the LLB to a folder and be done.

    There are references to the Linker: methods in the wiki entry for Pseudopath, but I can't figure out how the methods work :(

  6. QUOTE (Aristos Queue @ Dec 20 2008, 03:38 PM)

    The canonical solution is the static VI reference, introduced in the same version that the case structure optimizations went in.

    And, for the record, if you change the constant to a control then LV won't optimize it out -- at least, not in any version of LV that has shipped yet. It is entirely possible that LV could decide in a built application, where the Front Panel has been stripped out, if the bool is not on the conpane, then the case structure could be optimized. Not that I'm saying that change is coming... I'm just saying that you probably want to use a static VI reference.

    I don't know how to tag your post, but I feel compelled to do so...

  7. I'm upgrading a bunch of 7.0 code to 8.6. When I load a 7.0 VI that uses a case structure with a constant on the block diagram to disable code, LabVIEW converts the constant to a hidden control and reports a warning while opening.

    I think a constant causes the contents of the unused case to be optimized "out". If you're creating a new VI in 8.6 and have used a constant, maybe converting it to a hidden control will help...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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