NI TestStand

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

What are the advantages of using the C/CVI Standard Prototype adapter rather than the dll flexible prototype adapter ?

Is the first one speeder than the second ? Because on both, I program in C on LabWindowsCVI and so, I can't choose which adapter I will use for my project. But my project must be very fast so if there is a difference of speed, these will make the difference. Or is there a difference that I forget, something that I don't notice and makes a big difference between the two adapters ? Thanks in advance, regards.

Je programme sous LabwindowsCVI donc pour moi, il n'y a pas vraiment de différence entre le "C/CVI standard prototype adapter" et le "dll flexible prototype adapter". Je me demandais donc si par hasard, l'un des deux "adapters" serait plus rapide qu
e l'autre. A moins qu'il y ait un détail qui m'ai échappé et qui fasse une vrai différence entre les deux. Merci d'avance.
0 Kudos
Message 1 of 2
(2,620 Views)
Here are the similarities and differences in the C-Language Adapters:

C/CVI Standard Prototype Adapter Supported Features:
1) Test Functions can have a variety of prototypes - NO
2) Allows you to pass any argument to a test function directly - NO
3) Automatically passes a predefined set of common arguments to each function - YES
4) Code modules can be C source files, object files, or static libraries - YES
5) Can call DLLs created with MSVC++, Borland C++, Delphi, or another compiler - NO
6) Backward compatible with LabWindows/CVI Test Executive Toolkit - YES
7) Allows debugging C source files from TestStand - YES
😎 Allows debugging DLL functions from TestStand - YES
9) Can create source code from code templates - YES
10) Can use TestStand API within code modules - YES

DLL Flexible Prototype Adapter Supported Features:
1) Test Functions can have a variety of prototypes - YES
2) Allows you to pass any argument to a test function directly - YES
3) Automatically passes a predefined set of common arguments to each function - NO
4) Code modules can be C source files, object files, or static libraries - NO
5) Can call DLLs created with MSVC++, Borland C++, Delphi, or another compiler - YES
6) Backward compatible with LabWindows/CVI Test Executive Toolkit - NO
7) Allows debugging C source files from TestStand - NO
😎 Allows debugging DLL functions from TestStand - YES
9) Can create source code from code templates - YES
10) Can use TestStand API within code modules - YES

Since you stated that your main concern is differences in speed, the answer to this question depends upon how you are executing and debugging your code modules from within TestStand. If you are simply running a sequence in a "release" system (or non-debug), the adapters' performance are virtually the same. If you are debugging the dlls as they execute, and you are using "in-process" debugging with CVI on a C/CVI Std Prototype Adapter step, this is going to be slower due to the inherit overhead of this type of feature (in-process debugging is only available with the CVI Std Prototype Adapter). "External-process" debugging speed will largely depend upon the capabilities of the independent IDEs you decide upon using (external-process debugging is available with both adapters). Since, you said you would use CVI in either case, it will be the same with both adapters.

Hope this helps!

Jason F.
Applications Engineer
National Instruments
www.ni.com/ask
Message 2 of 2
(2,620 Views)