Phillip Brooks

I would look at the NI GPIB+ products (I have the NI PCI-GPIB+). The data sheet indicates that you can configure the board to be non intrusive (listener only; does not participate as a bus device). I've never used it in this way, but the documentation states it can be done, so it must be true

QUOTE (Pollux @ Sep 20 2008, 04:01 AM) You use Shift & Ctrl with sticky keys so that you can still use quick drop!

QUOTE (alfa @ Sep 19 2008, 03:41 AM) SRI? Are you referring to Serviciul Român de Informaţii? At first I thought you were referring to Stanford Research Institute.

QUOTE (PaulG. @ Sep 17 2008, 01:14 PM) Maybe so, but many of THEIR (NIs) customers ARE engineers I'm lucky that most of my projects have been instrumentation and data processing related; I've tinkered with XControls to help the front-end guys, but something (I don't know what) seems to be missing with them...

I remembered this post after reading your question. NI apparently was experimenting with MDI/TDI at one point, but this post is from four years ago

QUOTE (Aristos Queue @ Sep 17 2008, 12:54 AM) Does this mean that NI will finally replace those useless palettes with Quick Drop and the "LabVIEW Ribbon" (aka the garrote)? Will 'Spoolie' will finally make his debut? Where do I renew my SSP?! :laugh:

QUOTE (shoneill @ Sep 17 2008, 04:04 AM) There is a http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?board.id=170&thread.id=319502' target="_blank">pioneer beta program for 64 bit LabVIEW that you can sign up for...

I've confirmed this behavior in LV 7.0 and 8.6. I tried using some of the other structures (flat sequence and timed loop) and they seem to behave like the 'For Loop'. The conditional structure has the same problem. It seems that the ability of the scan from string function to see outside of a Boolean controlled structure is limited or somehow different. Don't know if it's a bug (present in 7.0 until today) but it's not necessarily a behavior that one would expect :thumbdown: Download File:post-949-1221563501.vi (LV 8.6) ( NOTE: A search of the dark side indicates that this is a known behavior, and NI does not necessarily consider it a bug. You could report it if it bothers you... )

QUOTE (Jim Kring @ Sep 11 2008, 12:16 AM) AND VI Analyzer!

I'll bet this company found our forums using sophisticated search queries such as "search engine sucks", then found one of these posts... Thanks Norm! :laugh:

QUOTE (Yair @ Sep 2 2008, 12:16 PM) You may be sad when you switch to 8.5 / 8.6 LV 8.6 Release Notes, Page 14: Opening LLBs in LabVIEW The Enable Windows Explorer for LLB files option on the Environment page of the Options dialog box no longer exists. LabVIEW opens LLBs in the LLB Manager window. Refer to the National Instruments Web site at ni.com/info and enter the info code http://digital.ni.com/public.nsf/websearch/8209AD1184FF4851862572270054427A?OpenDocument' target="_blank">exvfc5 for more information about opening LLBs.

QUOTE (Giseli Ramos @ Sep 1 2008, 04:13 PM) This may be and endian problem, http://forums.lavag.org/-t1993.html&view=findpost&p=6721' target="_blank">see here...

QUOTE (gmart @ Aug 28 2008, 04:37 PM) I suspect it will be noted in the release notes. It would read similar to Patient: "Doctor, it hurts when I do this" Doctor: "Don't DO THAT!" Bud-dum-tish!

Submit your current LabVIEW.INI and your suggestions on how to improve the Tools>>Options dialog in LabVIEW. http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?boar...age.id=405#M405

QUOTE (yen @ Oct 8 2007, 03:56 PM) I just read the Noel's Feature Brainstorming entry here, submitted my INI file and suggested that Darren's example VI be incorporated into the Options Dialog. I also went looking in the WIKI for the defaultConPane setting and couldn't find it (As Norm often says "search sucks"). I added defaultConPane to the Misc options page Let's see what happens...

QUOTE (Yair @ Aug 28 2008, 12:30 PM) Funny, when I tried to replace with a flat sequence, LabVIEW 8.6 crashed!?!

QUOTE (normandinf @ Aug 19 2008, 04:27 PM) Or in the case of LabVIEW prospects, the NI Forums or most importantly, LAVA! (As Michael already indicated). I hope I'm not in trouble. Maybe I should stay away from the lounge and BreakPoint from now on...

Paul, based on your avatar and numerous feline references, I just assumed you listen exclusively to "Cat" Stevens [/url]

QUOTE (LV_FPGA_SE @ Aug 12 2008, 12:15 PM) Did they change the rules? I thought NI employees couldn't take the exams...

QUOTE (neB @ Aug 8 2008, 12:07 PM) I remember reading (or writing) in a forum somewhere that the primitive names in LabVIEW are not always consistent with textual languages. The (my?) example was Modulus. In LV it's Quotient & Remainder.

This is a cross-post from the dark side

Ugh. I saved the file with the wrong name; it should be RFC 1738 Put Files.vi ... I think most FTP clients default to passive (for performance).

QUOTE (Neville D @ Aug 6 2008, 06:50 PM) I just went through a similar issue with using FTP to post test results to an off-site server. I found that Active = FALSE ( or Passive) was indeed much faster from the client for LIST and PUT, but the FTP server admin asked me to use Active for security and port range issues. I included a boolean in my higher level code (and ultimately my INI file) to set this based on the conditions of the deployed environment. Active FTP vs. Passive FTP, a Definitive Explanation UPDATE: Here is an example of what I use. I wanted to be able to test the ability to connect to the FTP server independent of LabVIEW, so I created a wrapper for the function "FTP Put Multiple Files and Buffers.vi" that parses an RFC-1738 FTP URL. I check for access to the server using the exact same string from IE or FireFox. If it doesn't work from those, then I might have a firewall or proxy problem. Download File:post-949-1218111686.vi (LV 7.0)

So, OK... my last post was lame, eh? Here is a cool web site for Torontonians. I just loaded StumbleUpon and "stumbled" onto this. I've been to Toronto a few times and its beautiful. The pictures on this sight prove it! I really like this one.

QUOTE (AnalogKid2DigitalMan @ Aug 6 2008, 10:40 AM) I suspect these are carry-over known issues from < 8.6 or found during beta trials but not fixed for the released version...