Power User rant...

[i2dx]

REALLY STRANGE. I was *allmost* sure, that I did no editing. Just to be really sure, I restartet my WorkingPC with LV 8.2 and tried to reproduce it. It worked as it is supposed to happen: The VI is closed, removed from memory and removed from the project tree.

Now I don't now exactly, what I did today in the morning, and how to get that reproduced. Hmm ... on the other hand ... I don't know if I really want this "effect" back, but I am sure, I'll get it back if I don't want it OK, I'll keep my eyes open. It seems, this behaviour has something to do with my own workflow. So I'll find out what happened, and tell you more if I know more ...

thx,

CB

OK, I got it: I made a right-click on my class and selected "VI" => I created a new member VI. As you allready wrote the name of the VI is changed, and there fore the changes have to be saved or you can defer the decision ...

[LAVA 1.0 Content]

i2dx,

I share your comments.

A thread in the forum on the NI site suddently switched to this topic as a result of a member's signature. It is halarious to read, but may also require :beer: . I even got a crazy icon out of it.

I hope you don't mind that I quoted some passages from this thread. It described the issues too well.

Here is the thread: http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?boar...message.id=2792

I appologize for not asking permission before posting over there. :worship:

This thread has been very interesting and informative to read. Thanks!! :thumbup:

JLV

[i2dx]

i2dx,

I share your comments.

[...]

I appologize for not asking permission before posting over there. :worship:

This thread has been very interesting and informative to read. Thanks!! :thumbup:

JLV

no problem, that's ok ...

I never used LV 8 in production, I tried it and this thread is one of the results . I'll give LV 8.2 a chance with a new project next week, we will see, what happens .

Maybe I will come out with an "old style VI Close tool"

cheers,

CB

[LAVA 1.0 Content]

It's funny...

You either have people who totally luv LV8,x ir you have people who (totally?) hate it..

But one thing for sure... it's the version which has created the most discussions to date..

and the most

[Louis Manfredi]

I never used LV 8 in production, I tried it and this thread is one of the results . I'll give LV 8.2 a chance with a new project next week, we will see, what happens .

Hi i2dx:

Mmm-- Same story with me, tried LV 8, generated a lot of forum traffic, tech support communications, wasted effort and smoke, but not much light, so I retreated to the stability of 7.1.1

I would like to use some of the new features in LV 8, but I don't need any of them. So I'm looking forward to hearing a report on your adventure with 8.2. Let us know how it goes.

Louis

[i2dx]

So I'm looking forward to hearing a report on your adventure with 8.2. Let us know how it goes.

I think it will work

my major mistake when switching from 7.1.1 to 8.0 in a running project was my enthusiasm was to expect a seamless upgrading like from LV 6.1 to 7.0 or 7.0 to 7.1. Now I know there will be some struggle and I have to change my "good old habits" when working with the project exporer and so on - next time I'll be well prepared and I have "no" pressure from the customer.

One reason for my rant was e.g. that I expected that some bugs in the TCP/IP communication VIs of the PDA Toolkit will be fixed, but they were not, furthermore I encountered new ones, which made it even harder to solve that problem. => the whole work for upgrading the project was more or less "reactive power", because there were no improvements to the code, but I had extra struggle with the new LV Version. Imagine that and combine it with a project out of time, over budget and a overstressed customer ... that's a bad mixture

cheers

CB

[Jacemdom]

I think it will work

my major mistake when switching from 7.1.1 to 8.0 in a running project was my enthusiasm was to expect a seamless upgrading like from LV 6.1 to 7.0 or 7.0 to 7.1. Now I know there will be some struggle and I have to change my "good old habits" when working with the project exporer and so on - next time I'll be well prepared and I have "no" pressure from the customer.

One reason for my rant was e.g. that I expected that some bugs in the TCP/IP communication VIs of the PDA Toolkit will be fixed, but they were not, furthermore I encountered new ones, which made it even harder to solve that problem. => the whole work for upgrading the project was more or less "reactive power", because there were no improvements to the code, but I had extra struggle with the new LV Version. Imagine that and combine it with a project out of time, over budget and a overstressed customer ... that's a bad mixture

cheers

CB

I think the migration from 7.1 to 8.x is similar to 5.x to 6.x when NI introduced the event structure...a lot of code needed to be updated and that generated a lot of extra work where i worked...i see the same with the project and the LVOOP...but i believe that i will prefer the beach on the other side of the river once i have managed to cross it, just like i would probably find it hard to work without the event structure now...i advise to be prepared when trying to cross the river...one can also drown in the process...

[Grampa_of_Oliva_n_Eden]

I am not sure if this is the correct place for this post but a power user rant seems appropriate

Has anyone tried to apply a password to a hiarchy yet?

If that isn't enough...

Have you looked at the Source Code Distribution that is included in the new LV Project file produced?

Ben

(not tested in LV 8.20 )

[crelf]

I don't know why everyone's complaining - any significantly large software project is going to have a bunch of irregularities in it - you just need to assess whether the bugs are a true show-stopper for you. It's a trade-off - functionality Vs bugs, and anyone saying they're not interested in the new functionality of 8 and 8.20 is either not a programmer or obviously hasn't used it. Personally, I 8 (and subsequently 8.20) - it's a great development platform with some paradigms that I drool over. Sure, there are a few issues that I have to deal with, but it's been like that since the first software was ever created (if you're waiting for a perfect LabVIEW release, or any other software release for that matter, then you'll die waiting). The only difference between the issues in 7 and 8 is that you've learned to live with the ones in 7 - if you were truly concerned about bugs in software, then you'd never turn your computer on

[i2dx]

Have you looked at the Source Code Distribution that is included in the new LV Project file produced?

yea, awfull, but luckily I have my "project duplicator tool", which excacly does, what the source code distribution function is intended to do. I hope to have time to add a "create Project" function in the LV 8.x version, soon. YOu can find that tool in the Code reposititory

I don't know why everyone's complaining - any significantly large software project is going to have a bunch of irregularities in it - you just need to assess whether the bugs are a true show-stopper for you. It's a trade-off - functionality Vs bugs, and anyone saying they're not interested in the new functionality of 8 and 8.20 is either not a programmer or obviously hasn't used it. [...]

I do not agree completely. I expect things to become better with a new release. In my eyes LV 8 was a marketing driven release - the NI Sales department became nervous, because NI missed the goal to release a x.0 version every second year -> therefore the engineers had to produce a release, which they could sell - ready or not.

But maybe my expectations are to high: If I get a "project exporer" I expect it to work as perfect as e.g. the project exporer in Visual Studio does. And the argument "you don't have to use it, if you don't like it" does not count. Sooner or later you have to use it, at least to build an executable ...

cheers,

CB

[crelf]

I expect things to become better with a new release.

I expect exisitng components to be better with a new release, but I can't bexpect new things to be better" there's no such thing as "New and improved" - it's either one or the other

In my eyes LV 8 was a marketing driven release...

I kind-of agree - I figure that NI had a target release date and they had to either rush or limit the functionality to get it out by then (hence LVOOP missing from the 8.0 release).

But maybe my expectations are to high: If I get a "project exporer" I expect it to work as perfect...

The project explorer is a completely different paradigm for LabVIEW - a fantastic new way of doing things that's been pined for for years. I expected a settling-in period Also, we've got a fairly varied crowd here, and if anyone's going to push these new features to their limits, then it's going to be the LAVA crew. Which brings me to an NI critism: unpaid beta programmes are never as efficient and far-reaching as paid beta programmes. An example: I was on the beta programme, and I've got work to do - I could only dedicate a very small amount of time (my own time) to screwing around with it. We were pretty heavy-on for work at the time (still are ) so all I could really do was ohh and ahh over the new features, and not try to really push it with a quasi-real project. I've been saying this for years: if NI contracted a number of people/companies (why not start with the Select Integrators?) to actually develop a real project in parallel to the normal development, I think a lot more of these issues would be stamped-out. Sure, keep the free beta programme too - it's obviously worthwhile, but if you want a dedicated real-world-style project, then paid is the only way to go (let's face it, did anyone on the beta programme do a real project to be delivered to their customer in the beta? I doubt it...

[i2dx]

I expect exisitng components to be better with a new release, but I can't bexpect new things to be better" there's no such thing as "New and improved" - it's either one or the other

hmm .... no. I expect NI either to bring in a feature which is ready for release or leave it. NI can't expect me to be a "volunteer" in an "experiment" (I wasn't in the beta programm at this time), because I paid for it and I expect therefore that it works properly. I am in production, my customers demand, that I do my best to deliver the best sofware I can, and so do I to my distributor.

You don't buy the brandnew model of BMW and accept, that there are stone hard seats ... you expect it to be better, faster, use less fuel, have a better sound system, etc, that's why you buy a new version. I'm not willing to pay for struggle, there is enough for it in my life - for free

Sure, keep the free beta programme too - it's obviously worthwhile, but if you want a dedicated real-world-style project, then paid is the only way to go (let's face it, did anyone on the beta programme do a real project to be delivered to their customer in the beta? I doubt it...

100% ACK - I was in the beta programm for LV 8.20, too (If I rant that much, I have to do my best to support NI do make it better ...) but compared to my normal work, I had only a small amount of time to test LV 8.2 beta ...

cheers,

CB

[crelf]

You don't buy the brandnew model of BMW and accept, that there are stone hard seats ... you expect it to be better, faster, use less fuel, have a better sound system, etc, that's why you buy a new version.

I don't agree, as that splits the arguement into two separate threads: functionality and stability. You might find that the seats are hard in your opinion, but they're still seats. If you expect BMW not to release any cars until their seats are absolutely bug-free, then you'll never get a car. If you expect BMW not release any cars unless their seats are absolutely perfect for you, then you'll never get a car. That's the whole point of improved products - honing them to try to satisfy the market. Which brings me to a second point - the market is constantly changing. But, as often occurs, I digress

NI, or BMW, anyone else for that matter, can't release 100% bug-free products - it's just not possible, and I think expecting them to is unfair. If you're really that upset about the number of bugs in LabVIEW (especially in the areas that are important to you) then be active in the beta programme - it's almost like complaining about the government after you didn't vote (one of my all-time pet hates )

Anyway, I don't mean to be too strong here, but I think LabVIEW 8 has been getting a disproportionate bashing of late. IMHO there are a handful of things that I'm not happy with (there will always be since NI isn't developing LabVIEW directly for me), but with the huge advancements I can work around the issues to enjoy the great benefits of the new features. As an aside: nothing inspires people to offer their opinion than if they don't like something - it'd be nice to hear more from those who are enjoying the new version like I am Or am I it?

[Jacemdom]

it'd be nice to hear more from those who are enjoying the new version like I am Or am I it?

I like LV8 and i decided a month ago to go trough with the upgrade process of all our projects/libraries and methodology. When 8 came out, i dived right into it and quickly realized that i would have to be prepared mentally, physically and importantly projectly, to go ahead with the upgrade.

If i compare upgrading with going up a staircase, then :

3 --> 4 = 1 step

4 --> 5 = 1 step

5 --> 6 = 2 steps (events brought a whole new categories of tools and ways to resolve a problem)

6 --> 7 = 1 step

7 --> 8 = 3 steps (mainly what surrounds the project way of organizing and the features that this permits)

With 8.0 NI touched something that i add began or already resolved in my own way due the the lack of it in LV. I'm almost true with the upgrade and even tough i add some big questions on how to merge the new NI way of organizing with mine, i can say that i now believe it will probably allow me to go even further...

It was a big jump for me...

The biggest thing i would like right now is a"BuildTargetBuildSpecification.vi" with feedback...maybe LV8.2.1 or 9.0 or maybe an NI LV developper could do a quick VI that does that and publish it on this site or NI's...

[Rolf Kalbermatter]

But maybe my expectations are to high: If I get a "project exporer" I expect it to work as perfect as e.g. the project exporer in Visual Studio does. And the argument "you don't have to use it, if you don't like it" does not count. Sooner or later you have to use it, at least to build an executable ...

Lucky you! You seem never have to worked with older Visual Studio software releases :-)

Rolf Kalbermatter

Sure, keep the free beta programme too - it's obviously worthwhile, but if you want a dedicated real-world-style project, then paid is the only way to go (let's face it, did anyone on the beta programme do a real project to be delivered to their customer in the beta? I doubt it...

There are better ways to commit suicide

Rolf Kalbermatter

[i2dx]

Lucky you! You seem never have to worked with older Visual Studio software releases :-)

hmm ... no. I used Borland in 1994 for C development, and somewhen later I used VS 6.0 (from 1999 I think ...) for C and C++.

BTW: the one and ony deveopment environment I never had struggle with was Basic on my C64, reason: there was allmost no (i)DE - nevertheless, I did earn some money with that machine ...

hmm ... that makes me think: allmost no struggle = some bucks, lots of struggle = big bucks ... hmmm .... where can I get the most buggy IDE ever availiable in this universe?

cheers,

CB

[LAVA 1.0 Content]

hmm ... that makes me think: allmost no struggle = some bucks, lots of struggle = big bucks ... hmmm .... where can I get the most buggy IDE ever availiable in this universe?

A colleague of mine shudders every time he hears the words ADA and Green Hills Software.

[Mike Ashe]

...The project explorer is a completely different paradigm for LabVIEW - a fantastic new way of doing things that's been pined for for years. I expected a settling-in period

I had to laugh at this one. I agree with you, but it reminded me of when the original Star Trek series came out. It brought SciFi to the masses, and in that respect it was fantastic, a completely new paradigm for the "Leave it to Beaver" family. But as SciFi goes it was obsolete on arrival, broke no new ground, just exposed the masses to what was now cliche in the SciFi world, ... old hat. The LabVIEW Project Explorer sort of reminds me of that. I am very glad to have it, but I sort of wish it was more mature and up to speed with explorers in the various text languages. I don't mean that as a criticism of the LabVIEW team, it obviously took a lot of work and I'm sure we'll see additions and improvements with each new version, still.

Also, we've got a fairly varied crowd here, and if anyone's going to push these new features to their limits, then it's going to be the LAVA crew. Which brings me to an NI critism: unpaid beta programmes are never as efficient and far-reaching as paid beta programmes. ... I've been saying this for years: if NI contracted a number of people/companies (why not start with the Select Integrators?) to actually develop a real project in parallel to the normal development, I think a lot more of these issues would be stamped-out.

I agree. I was on the "Beta" (read, technical reviewers team) for the recently released book, "LabVIEW for Everyone, 3rd". We didn't make a mint, but we were all paid a small "honorarium" of a few hundred. Nothing compared to the hours that went into doing a good review, but it established a contract and expectations and it paid for a couple of good date nights with my wife, which partially compensated for the time spent. I think, as a first step, NI could adompt this model and pay a few beta testers a few hundred each and get a vastly improved beta program.

let's face it, did anyone on the beta programme do a real project to be delivered to their customer in the beta? I doubt it...

There are better ways to commit suicide

Confession time: I did that, once, (and only once), but it was at my customer's request, because the new version had features we had to have (working both linux and windows, linux was the reason for using beta software) and we had the benefit of knowing that our project was going to take long enough that we would not be finished before the real version came out. Doing the first couple of deliveries with beta software really moved our development along, but it was painful, really painful. Never again, even if it is requested. (Well, maybe I have to qualify that ... I cannot honestly say that, "they couldn't pay me enough to do it again" )

[crelf]

...But as SciFi goes it was obsolete on arrival, broke no new ground, just exposed the masses to what was now cliche in the SciFi world, ... old hat. The LabVIEW Project Explorer sort of reminds me of that. I am very glad to have it, but I sort of wish it was more mature and up to speed with explorers in the various text languages.

Therefore, LabVIEW Project Explorer = StarTrek, and a more mature Project Explorer = Battlestar Galactica... (but even BattleStar Galactica had to start somewhere - look at the awesome improvement from the old 80s series to the new one - crikey!)

[Mike Ashe]

Therefore, LabVIEW Project Explorer = StarTrek, and a more mature Project Explorer = Battlestar Galactica... (but even BattleStar Galactica had to start somewhere - look at the awesome improvement from the old 80s series to the new one - crikey!)

If we get that much improvement in the next NI version of LabVIEW Explorer I will publicly kiss the carpet after the NI R&D team walks over it at the next NIWeek ...

(Is there any way NI could add a help avatar to the Explorer, ... and make it Boomer?)