what different between labview and other programming languages?

[mig-31]

@Dennis_Knutson

You said:

If your spelling and grammar in a text based language is poor, you cannot compile the code. The point being that with LabVIEW, poor spelling and grammar is less important and non-english speakers should have an easier time of it.

It is not true. You can produce good code without good English spelling and grammar. You can add comments to you on any language. There are a lot of proggrams without good English.

@Dennis_Knutson

When we are talking about text programming languages, there is not only MS$ NET Platform, which needs NET Framework. There are other OSes here Linux, MacOS X, FreeBSD not only bad stable Windows. gcc, freepascal and deplhi doen's need any Run Time Engine on background. 

[mig-31]

@altenbach

It is not true that all languages need RUN TIME Engine. C/C++ (gcc compiler, Visual C++, C++Builder), Object Pascal (Delphi, FreePascal) don't need it.

But there are NET Platform , Java, Python , which need it. 

[RavensFan]

Bad grammar and spelling in writing the English language means an English speaking person is going to have a difficult time in reading it.

The equivalence to spelling and grammar in a programming language is called spelling and syntax.  If they are bad in a programming language, the compiler (the software that "reads" you text based code and acts on it) is not going to have a difficult time reading.  It is going to completely FAIL at reading it.

Why do you think not needing a runtime engine is a good thing?  Run-time engines are there to contain all operating libraries that are common between all programs into a single package.  Yes you could have something that is compiled into an .exe that doesn't need a run-time.  But that means it also needs the code to know how to draw on screen, communicate with a disk drive, communicate with a network.  That would all have to be included in ProgramA.exe It would then also need to be included into ProgramB.exe,  then ProgramC.exe.

Please have a clue as to what you are speaking about if you are going to continue to troll here.

[PaulG.]

---

@mig-31 wrote:

Hi,

my opinion is Labview is worse compare to any text languages C/C++, espesially Pascal based language:

1) basicly you can't produce good readle and commneted code in Labview,

2) you should remember how to look a lot of pictures; in text languages you usually have around 50 key words = pascal use a lot of English word, it very good to understand,

4) modern RAD software can display help for function in popup ballon,

5) you can easy to move through a code in modern RAD software.

---

You have no idea what you are talking about. Stop wasting our time. Go back to work. 

[altenbach]

---

mig-31 wrote:

you can generate execute file for different platforms Windows, Linux, FreeBSD and so on, NET platform not .

---

Once the exectuable does singificantly more than write "hello world" and needs to interface with the system and DAQ hardware, you will run into so many incompatibilities that you will no longer support more that a few very well defined targets. We program for the real world, not some fantasy land. 😄

LabVIEW runs on Windows, MAC, Linux, as well as on embedded targets. It can even run directly on an FPGA fabric. And you can develop code in a single LabVIEW project that seamlessly combine e.g. windows|embedded|FPGA into one.

So, what was your point?

[altenbach]

---

mig-31 wrote:

It is not true that all languages need RUN TIME Engine. C/C++ (gcc compiler, Visual C++, C++Builder), Object Pascal (Delphi, FreePascal) don't need it.

---

Interesting. Does that mean that I can uninstall everything shown below and everything will continue to work? 😮

(This is a screenshot of my "programs and features" tool in windows 7). 

 

You are very disrespectful to all the (excellent!) text programmers that dedicated their careers to write all these libraries!

[billko]

---

@mig-31 wrote:

Hi,

my opinion is Labview is worse compare to any text languages C/C++, espesially Pascal based language:

1) basicly you can't produce good readle and commneted code in Labview,

2) you should remember how to look a lot of pictures; in text languages you usually have around 50 key words = pascal use a lot of English word, it very good to understand,

4) modern RAD software can display help for function in popup ballon,

5) you can easy to move through a code in modern RAD software.

 

---

Basically you have no idea how to document LabVIEW code.

1) The free label is just one way (and oftentimes not even the most efficient way) to document your LabVIEW code.  Good LabVIEW developers use what is loosely referred to as "self-documenting" code, which generally means controls and indicators have easy to understand labels, icons are meaningful and you provide meaningful names for each subVI.  You can also import PICTURES into the block diagram as an additional documentation aid.

2) IMHO pictures are a lot easier to understand than words.  What if Chinese is your native language?  In that case you have to memorize every key word and you have no context help because you have no idea what the word actually means.  There's a reason why international signs are pictures and not words.

3) Hey, where's number 3???

4) With LabVIEW you can add your own popups rather easliy - in fact, that is a prefered method of documentation.  You can also specify a help file if you wanted to.

5) I'll have to concede this point somewhat.  In LabVIEW, each VI opens up in its own window so you can have a zillion windows open at once.  However, judcious use of Bookmarks makes it easy to go directly to the VI (or VIs) with the same bookmark.  Furthermore, using bookmarks makes generating requirements documentation easy if your bookmarks contain the paragraph numbers of the requirements.  If you organize your project correctly, finding the specific VI you want is very easy also.

[Bob_Schor]

My favorite "algorithmic" text-based Programming Language is Pascal.  I regret I haven't used it in about a decade, because (a) I'm mostly doing real-time data acquisition and control, (b) I'm trying to create programs that "interact" with the user in meaningful and intuitive ways (so I don't need a lot of "language" or "explanation" to have the user run the program properly -- a big green "Go!" and red "Stop!" button + a scrolling chart showing the acquired data are pretty self-explanatory), and (c) I need my program to be keenly aware of Time.

Pascal (sadly) does none of these, whereas LabVIEW does all of them, and does them very well.  It is, of course, possible (and surprisingly easy) to write terrible-looking (and probably terrible running, but who can tell?) code in LabVIEW, but developing a Good Programming Style take discipline, no matter what Language you are using.

Bob Schor

P.S. -- is there a decent Pascal system that implements the ISO-10206 standard and runs (well) on Windows 7?  It appears that Prospero has disappeared (we miss you, Tony) ...

[altenbach]

Yes, I learned Pascal back in 1983(?) and it was certainly different to the FORTRAN IV I learned 10 years earlier. 😄 I have the greatest respect for Niklaus Wirth, my swiss compatriot. 😄 He was instrumental in many aspects of computing and I am sure even LabVIEW benefitted from his wisdom indirectly.

Programming languages come and go and pretty much follow the same evolutionary pressure as life on earth. It is the survival of the fittest! Sadly, Pascal could no adapt to the changing environment. TImes have changed and we no longer need to debate the advantages of betamax over VHS. Both are obsolete!

All this makes the almost 30 year track record of LabVIEW even more surprising. Not only was it  able to adapt and keep up, it was even trailblazing in many areas!

[ouadji]

@ altenbach :

" There is even a Chess program written entirely in LabVIEW "

thank you very much altenbach. 

I'm still working on the next version
But I'm soon moving out ! So, I do not have a lot of time (for the moment) to dedicate to this.
that said, the work is already well under way..