How detect automaticaly unsupport Vi

[Bobillier]

Hi

I find a strang thing when i have upgrade one old Vi (s)version (7.0) to 9.0. When i open Vi(s) in LV2009 all seem OK (no break arrow) but when i run it, the vi don't do correct result. After few investigations, i have find the bug. It's arround "write to text file" Vi . When i look on help, i see that Vi is unsupport in LV2009.But don't generate error

My question is: is there a way to automaticaly detect unsupport Vi , when i upgrade project.

Eric

[Neville D]

This may not answer your question directly, but thats why you should first backup your existing code, then upgrade and test your code in the new version. Also take a look at the Upgrade Notes. They are invaluable for specific changes between versions. You should look at "Upgrading from Version 7".

I'm not sure which VI you are talking about, but unsupported does not mean buggy. It means NI will move away from these VI's probably to a new/different API. The old VI's should still work as before, but if you were to open them up, they probably use newer File functions.

N.

Edited March 2, 2011 by Neville D

[Phillip Brooks]

Hi

I find a strang thing when i have upgrade one old Vi (s)version (7.0) to 9.0. When i open Vi(s) in LV2009 all seem OK (no break arrow) but when i run it, the vi don't do correct result. After few investigations, i have find the bug. It's arround "write to text file" Vi . When i look on help, i see that Vi is unsupport in LV2009.But don't generate error

My question is: is there a way to automaticaly detect unsupport Vi , when i upgrade project.

Eric

When I upgraded from 7.0 to 8.6, my group used something called VI Analyzer. There are specific tests that you can select/install called the VI Upgrade Analyzer.

See here:

http://decibel.ni.com/content/docs/DOC-6141

[jgcode]

I'm not sure which VI you are talking about, but unsupported does not mean buggy.

I would disagree

I inherited some 7.1 code and upgraded to 2010. Legacy unsupported code (now using datasocket) returned incorrect tag values (haven't reported it yet, don't know if anyone would care tho).