LabWindows/CVI

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

LabWindows 2013 breaks LabWindows 2012 code

Valid executable written in LabWindows/CVI 2012 will not compile in LabWindows/CVI 2103.  The error is compiler out of memory.  The error syntax includes suggestions to fix this problem by basically segmenting code into smaller c files - rewrite the code.  In addtion new warnings are detected for each number cast - I am sure I can turn this off but why is it added?.  None of these issues occur with the code in 2012. Question is what has changed? and why?  What reason should I consider for going through the effort of rewriting my code to make it compile in 2013?

0 Kudos
Message 1 of 4
(3,832 Views)

How long is your code?

0 Kudos
Message 2 of 4
(3,827 Views)

the exec is 1.3 megabyte. 

By the way I read of a fix that often works -  by turning off run time error checking.  But I am interested in knowing what changed to make this error pop up and why did the designers change the compiler in this manner.

In addtion the code is supported by one custom and one vendor dll.

0 Kudos
Message 3 of 4
(3,817 Views)

Hello mpencke,

 

Clang 2.9 (the compiler used by LabWindows/CVI 2013) might throw an out-of-memory message in 2 situations: when it literally runs out of memory or when it crashes. You could follow the memory usage to determine in what situation you might be. If the memory usage increases significantly (close to 2GB), then the out-of-memory message is indeed valid. If the memory usage is not increasing close to the 2 GB limit during the compilation process, then the compiler is crashing. 

The CVI 2013 Patch f1 brings some critical fixes to the compiler. I suggest trying upgrading and see if the issue persists. If the issue does persist, you could try turning off run-time checking and optimisations. Another thing you could do is to track the code that's causing the issue or send us a stripped version of your project that exhibits the issue and we will investigate, possibly suggesting a work-around.

 

Did turning of run-time checking work for you? 

 

Best regards,

=Nelu F. || National Instruments.

0 Kudos
Message 4 of 4
(3,755 Views)