addition within a table?

[labnoob]

Hi,

I’m scratching my head a bit here! I’m trying to do some simple addition within a table. The user enters values into column 0. I.e. 0,1,2,2,2. In column 1 I would like it to read the value from my ‘start vol’ control and add the value in ‘set point 1’ then for the consecutive rows, i.e. setpoint 2, 3 etc, i would like it to take the previous rows column 1 vlaue and add it to the new setpoint value.

Ive created a screenshot of exactly what im after. Ive been playing about with property nodes to feed values back in, but I’ve drawn a blank!

Any ideas?

[David. B]

Hello,

Is this similar to what you had in mind? (attached)

It requires converting the table to an array to do the manipulation. The attached VI is a very simple version but you should easily be able to adapt it for your solution.

Kind Regards

[labnoob]

thanks David,

yes its similar. I had already started going down a route just like that so im encouraged!

Thanks again

[labnoob · Accepted solution]

I have a a solution, so thought i'd post it in case anyone else has a similar problem

[altenbach]

Your code is highly flawed!! 😞

• Every time you run the VI, the table data grows by one column. That is a serious memory leak!!! (create an indicator for the array size and run the VI many times to see!)
• The flat sequence structure has no useful function. Delete it!
• Why do you need a "loop count" control? Simply use the array size.
• Why is "start vol" orange? It should be an integer, because the rest of the code ignores decimal fractions anyway.
• Your algorithm with reversing, subsetting and reconverting all existing values from string over and over is very inefficient. Backwards!
• Use a local variable instead of a value property node.
• Be polite and name attached VIs with a descriptive file name. Using "untitled.vi" is just plain rude.
• The "start vol" control belongs before the loop. It does not need to be read with each iteration and we need to exclude the possibility that it is changed by the user at a random iteration.
• ...

Here's a quick rewrite. Do you agree it is significantly simpler?

(see also my general comments here)

[labnoob]

Yes, I agree much simpler. Thank you for spending time on it.

Let me ask you something, what make you think its ok to publicly humiliate people less knowledgeable than you? I see it seems to be a hobby of yours??  It’s clear you have a very good understanding of LabVIEW, however your responses to threads could be much more constructive and less arrogant. Just a suggestion.   

[smercurio_fc]

Wouldn't you agree that the arrogance lies in those who say they found a solution (which is clearly not even close to being a solution) without really understanding what's going on or what they are doing?

[altenbach]

---

labnoob wrote:

... however your responses to threads could be much more constructive and less arrogant.

---

How else would you call giving a list of eight well defined factual constructive points as well as a complete rewrite of the flawed original VI.

What would you suggest to make it more constructive??? 😮

What would you suggest to make a post less arrogant??? 😮

You must be reading something else because no arrogance was intended or is present. What do you want me to do? Put a smiley face after each line? This is not a social forum, but involves purely technical discussions.

My post does not contain any words with emotional connotations, except maybe for the comment about the file name. This was just lazy on your part. My internet folder contains hundreds of VIs labeled "untitled (x).vi, all from the forum here, so you are not alone. A descriptive file names is an essential part of a well written VI. If you only give it a throwaway name, I would think that you are not proud of your creation. (now I am reading between the lines! ;)). My choice of words was to ensure that the quote is memorable. 😄

I've been programming LabVIEW for over 16 years on a daily basis, so necessarily I've probably made many more mistakes than you, but each mistake is a learning experience. My personal rule is that I am allowed to make every mistake exactly once. You made mistakes here and there is nothing wrong with that. It is part of the learning experience. Think of Thomas Alva Edison, when, after many failed attempts to make a light bulb said: "We now know a thousand ways not to build a light bulb".

While I probably cannot make my post more constructive and less arrogant, here's how it would have read making it less constructive and more arrogant:

<kidding>You must be dumb because your VI is total garbage and there are numerous mistakes that you better try to find yourself. </kidding>.

Right?

[SteveChandler]

---

@labnoob wrote:

Yes, I agree much simpler. Thank you for spending time on it.

Let me ask you something, what make you think its ok to publicly humiliate people less knowledgeable than you? I see it seems to be a hobby of yours??  It’s clear you have a very good understanding of LabVIEW, however your responses to threads could be much more constructive and less arrogant. Just a suggestion.   

---

As usual Christian says it better than I could but here is my input.

If you look at my user ID you will see that it is a four digit number. I have been on these forums for a very long time although I only came out of lurk mode relatively recently. I have been reading Christian Altenbach's posts for a long time and posts from the other Knights and Knights to be. They all have their own personalities. The one thing I can say about Christian's posts is that they are always very constructive. If he does not give an appropriate solution it is because the question is vague or otherwise unclear in which case he asks for clarification so that he can give an appropriate solution.

Arrogant: adj, having or showing an exaggerated opinion of one's own importance, merit, ability, etc. It is no exaggeration that his code is just plain superior. His contributions to these forums are extremely important and his abilities far exceed those of the vast majority. He cannot be called arrogant because of the missing requirement of exaggeration. If he sounds harsh it is because he is direct. If a VI "makes very little sense" he will say so. And wouldn't you want to know if your code is flawed so you can make it better while learning something new? But he is not trying to humiliate anybody. Helping people with LabVIEW is his hobby and he clearly enjoys it - he is only trying to teach. He does an excellent job of that for a literally unbeatable price.

[JÞB]

---

@Steve Chandler wrote:

---

@labnoob wrote:

Yes, I agree much simpler. Thank you for spending time on it.

Let me ask you something, what make you think its ok to publicly humiliate people less knowledgeable than you? .

---

Arrogant: adj, having or showing an exaggerated opinion of one's own importance, merit, ability, etc. It is no exaggeration that his code is just plain superior.

---

<Set Sea Story Mode==TRUE>

I'm a good (amongst friendly games) chess player- I was once set-up to play a nice game of chess at a familly gathering against an acquiantence of my sister.  A Sr. Master ranked player.   I spent a few minutes learning the hard way that I was grossly out classed.  after a tradgic defeat I asked his rank and what my mistakes were.  He very quickly reset the final board, reversed the moves to my fatal mistake and explained why he chose that move to stop my game and precisely why it was unrecoverable from my side at that point.  He meant to instruct me as I asked and, although my family thought I'd be humiliated by the exchange I found myself honored to get a lesson from a true master.

Neither, would I expect to lay a glove on a champion boxer! 

Altenbach's analisys of the flaws in your code was a demonstration of mastery and brevity.  Your original post asked for help on how to make the vi work- not how to make you feel good about writing poor code