Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Here is the set-up:

 

I have a component project library (StepperMotor.lvlib) that I have moved to the userlib in order to facilitate reuse over multiple projects.  Within the library I have

1) a strict typedef (StepperMotor.ctl) cluster that contains a numeric control for expressing the maximum output step rate.

2) the StepperMotor.lvclass, an abstract class that contains effectively virtual methods (they do nothing but wire inputs to outputs) and LabVIEW-generated accessor methods for the two items in the class private data.

This is LabVIEW 2013 SP1 on Windows 8.1.

 

 

OK, so I start with everything clean (git status reports clean, LabVIEW opens and closes the library without prompting for changes).

1) Then I open the StepperMotor.ctl directly from Windows Explorer (hence not opening the library), change the range of the numeric from 2 kHz to 4 kHz, and save it.

 

 

2) Then I open the library, make no further changes, and attempt to close the library.  LabVIEW correctly prompts me to save changes.  I opt to close the project without saving changes, however.

 

3) Next I discard the change to StepperMotor.ctl using git.  (I have been using Discard in SourceTree, or a git reset --hard command.)  Then git status returns a clean status.

 

4) I open the project and attempt to close it.  Since I have reverted all changes, LabVIEW does not prompt to save changes.

 

So far, so good.  This is expected behavior.

 

Now, I repeat the steps, except that in step

1) I open the library first, open the typedef control from the project, make the same change, save the control (without applying the changes), and close the project (without saving).

2) is the same as above (OK).

3) is the same as above.  Again, git status shows me everything is clean.

4) I perform the same action as above, but this time LabVIEW prompts me to save all the accessor methods on the class, citing a changed typedef (even though if I open the typedef the range is indeed back to its original value).  This is unexpected behavior.

 

Worse yet, even if I perform a git reset --hard and verify with a git status that everything is clean, if I open and immediately attempt to close the project, LabVIEW still prompts to save, citing "Type Definition modified".  This is indeed problematic.

 

(Further note: If I let LabVIEW save the changes, git status still shows clean, and LabVIEW opens and closes the project without prompts.)

 

 

 

 

post-6989-0-15856100-1395249831.png

post-6989-0-06952900-1395250001.png

post-6989-0-59620500-1395250294_thumb.pn

Link to post

I didn't read this discussion closely enough to see if you were already part of it, but if you haven't read it, I think it touches on your problem. Steven Mercer talks about the differences in typedef behavior between different LabVIEW versions and says 2014 vastly improves upon this.

 

https://decibel.ni.com/content/thread/20339

Link to post
Do you have compiled code separated?

Yes

I didn't read this discussion closely enough to see if you were already part of it, but if you haven't read it, I think it touches on your problem. Steven Mercer talks about the differences in typedef behavior between different LabVIEW versions and says 2014 vastly improves upon this.

 

https://decibel.ni.com/content/thread/20339

Yes, I have seen that thread.

 

Yes, there is a nebulous promise that NI is working on something, but whether or not it will address this specific issue is unknowable from that thread.

 

I understand the font issue as a cause, but that clearly is not the cause in the problem I have presented.

Link to post

Note: In post #1 where I have "project" I should have written "library".  In this specific example I only used the library interface, although the results are the same with the project interface.



Another note: LabVIEW wants to save all the accessor methods, even those that deal with the other attribute of the class.  On the other hand, the *almost* virtual methods that are also members of the class have object instances (in and out control and indicator), but LabVIEW does not feel the need to save these.  This may show the problem is with the class private data bundle/unbundle nodes.

Link to post

I've seen similar behavior. I managed to isolate a pretty simple example and sent it in with the CAR I quoted in the linked thread.

Paul, I have no advice other than showing it to an AE if you can isolate the code and aren't prevented from giving it to NI. This issue has been an issue for years and the more examples NI can get, the more hope there may be of fixing the behavior.

Link to post
  • 2 weeks later...

Nice. Same CAR. That makes me feel better-- that the problem has been characterized enough such that it has been identified as the same issue in multiple requests.

Link to post

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.

  • Similar Content

    • By maristu
      I’m a big fan of JKI VIPM, and I’ve been usen Source code control with labview for some years (First with mercurial and now with GIT). Following the good practices with SCC and LabVIEW I always check the separate compiled code from vi to avoid unwanted changes on Vis.
      In the other hand I’ve read that the performance of labview is better with the compiled code in the VI. Besides that the labview IDE does not allow you clear compiled cache of some of your vis, you have to delete all the compiled cache…When I have some compilation errors and I delete the compiled cache It takes a lot of time to open again the project…
      My question is… VIPM allows you to execute some code after the package installation (post-installation-action). Could it be a good idea to unmark the separate compiled code programmatically on each installed file (vi, ctl, class, lvlib… )?.
      Maybe I have to make this question in VIPM forums also, to check when is executed that post-installation-action, if it is executed before or after the masscompiling
       
      Thanks!!
    • By drjdpowell
      Who uses Git Submodules?  I know Greg Payne does and have watched his talk, but does anyone else have experience.   I'm especially interested in experience with projects with multiple developers and multiple products (that might need to use different versions of the subprojects).  
    • By Francois Normandin
      As I've reported in the UI Tools support page, I've started migrating the open source code I still have on bitbucket (Mercurial-based repos) to Github.
      I didn't think that it might be worth a specific topic until @LogMAN mentioned it. Personally, I'm moving my code to Github in the process. I know there are some reports of Hg-to-Git transitions not going so well when using sub-repositories, so please share your migration experience if you've had to jump into some hoops to get it done!
      For all of you who still use Mercurial and host your open source and/or enterprise repos on Bitbucket, this blog post is worth reading:
    • By The Q
      The QControl Toolkit by Q Software Innovations is an object-oriented and extensible alternative to XControls. Use the QControl Toolkit framework and the QControl Creation Wizard to create QControl Classes and receive the benefits of XControls without the headaches. Take advantage of easy UI logic code reuse. Encapsulate and decouple the UI logic away from the business logic of the main application and from the UI skin. Use wherever the VI Server and LabVIEW object-oriented programming are allowed. Easily extend the capabilities of current LabVIEW controls through access to all properties available at run time. And easily use the toolkit with more complex frameworks like the Actor Framework or other plugin architectures where LabVIEW libraries and packed project libraries are used and where XControls can behave unpredictably. 

      Check it out now on the NI Tools Network here.
      I also started a thread on the NI Community: UI Interest Group page, here.
    • By etgohomeok
      I use SVN for version control in my project and am often faced with many conflicted VIs that must be dealt with. I have found that frequently, the changes causing these conflicts are not "real" changes (for example, a wire was moved or a typedef for a cluster control was changed). So, I am trying to create a tool that queries my project directory for any VIs that have conflicts, and running the VI Comparison tool with only non-cosmetic changes enabled to automatically find VIs that don't have any "real" changes and marked the conflicts as resolved. I would like to build the tool into a .exe because I would like to be able to run this tool from the command-line so that I can create a right-click menu item in my Windows environment to easily run the tool from any folder containing conflicted files.
       
      I found vi.lib\SourceControl\support\SCCSup Compare Two VIs.vi which performs the comparison operation, allows me to specify which types of changes to detect, and returns if there are differences. This is exactly what I need and it works perfectly in the development environment. However, when I build my tool to a .exe file, I get a LabVIEW error with the following description:
      Error 1574 occurred at Open VI Reference in SCCSup Compare Two VIs.vi->Resolve False Conflicts.vi Possible reason(s): LabVIEW:  (Hex 0x626) Cannot open a file with separated compiled code in the LabVIEW Run-Time Engine. An error occurred loading VI 'my.vi'. LabVIEW load error code 59: The source file's compiled code has been separated, and this version of LabVIEW does not have access to separated Where my.vi is the path to the VI that it is attempting to compare. All of the VIs in my project have "Separate compiled code" enabled since I use version control on them, therefore turning it off it not an option. Is there any way to get around this issue?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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