Jump to content
JackDunaway

Bug in Variant Coercion

Recommended Posts

Attached is a bug we've run across where the data name is not properly interprete in the variant coercion process. The bug manifests itself in different ways in 2009 and 2010, but is present in both versions (see FP of attached VI for details).

BugInVariantCoercion_2009.vi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I see the bug too, but I've got to admit that you confused me even futher by swapping the indicators on the FP (double click on your terminals on the BD to see what I mean). I note that if the representation of the numerics in the arrays are different then the bug goes away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I see the bug too, but I've got to admit that you confused me even futher by swapping the indicators on the FP (double click on your terminals on the BD to see what I mean). I note that if the representation of the numerics in the arrays are different then the bug goes away.

Thanks for the confirmation - crelf! I'll pass on the UI recommendation to the guy who made the UI wink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, if you add an AlwaysCopy node on the notWorkingTest1 wire the DataType.Label becomes 'notWorkingTest2'

BTW I get the same thing in 2011-64bit

Cheers,

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In LabVIEW 2009, I found that the wire that is coerced first's data name is written to all the indicators. I was able to reproduce the 2010 behavior in 2009:

post-16870-0-45999900-1304700727_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In LabVIEW 2009, I found that the wire that is coerced first's data name is written to all the indicators.

Hmmm - good catch. Looks like a coercion bug?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fortunately using the convert to variant function removes the possibility for the bug to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fortunately using the convert to variant function removes the possibility for the bug to happen.

True, this is a valid workaround, thanks TG! (see snippet) This is a known issue, CAR 279047.

post-17237-0-61759200-1306340910_thumb.p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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