Weekly Bugs

[shoneill]

This link to a possible method to report bugs is quite useful. I kind of thought of the forum here as a pre-bug report question. I really don't like it when people shout "BUG" when it's clearly a misunderstanding of the underlying processes. I wanted to rule this out before making any kind of "official" bug report.

I'm old and ugly enough to realise that I don't understand everything, and a lot of what I think I understand I don't. Ray Farmer has in the meantime reported that he doesn't see the "bug" in LV 7.0 or 7.1, thus hinting at the fact that the "Bug" is obsolete.

Shane.

[Ben]

Ditto that Shane!

The purpose of this thread was orininally mentioned in this thread

http://forums.ni.com/ni/board/message?board.id=BreakPoint&message.id=18&jump=true

on about 5/25.

This thread is quickly showing its value.

WE should continue to use it as we have.

To date, I have taken responsibility for reporting every bug reported.

I will continue to do so until officially releived of duty (God, willing).

So,

Keep those bug Q's coming!

Ben

[altenbach]

This thread shows a curious behavior. It seems that in LabVIEW 6.1 and 7.1, it is not possible to set the "connector pane" VI property to "read".



It works fine in 7.0, and if I convert a 7.0 VI to 7.1, it continues to work. (I have not tried 7.1.1).

Am I missing something obvious? 🙂

Message Edited by altenbach on 06-08-2005 04:55 PM

[waldemar.hersacher]

Same problem in LV 7.1.1.

[altenbach]

Actually, according to the LV7.1 help, this property is write only for some (probably very deep) reason. 😉

Two questions remain:

Why does it work at all with the special LV7.0 node? Where did that come from?

What is the correct way to change the connectors to "required" programmatically?

I guess Ben identified the cause for the first question. Apparently, I had a special entry in my LabVIEW ini that activated the hidden scripting features for my LabVIEW 7.0 installation only. I don't remember adding that, must have happened very long (years) ago.

So maybe an answer to question 2 is not possible without this switch.

Message Edited by altenbach on 06-09-2005 12:08 AM

[RayFarmer]

Hi,

I dont see this working in LV7.0, what is this special setting.

any of these.

Regards
Ray Farmer

[altenbach]

I don't know if it is in Brian's list.

Sorry, I guess you have to be logged into the lava forum for the above mentioned link to work.

(If you don't want to do that, look at the cached entry from google. ;))

I don't want to give the naked entry without all the disclaimers on that page. The're an integral part of it.

[tst]

2 points I'd like to make:
1. There are 2 seperate ConPane properties - one which is only writable and another one, which is hidden.
2. If people keep discussing specific bugs in this thread, it will lose its purpose (alerting people to bugs), because people won't be able to follow the debates. The proper course of action should be to post a link to a thread about the bug.

[shoneill]

Well maybe the best approach would be for a board to discuss bugs where each bug has its own thread.

Reporting a bug without discussion is counter-productive in my opinion because people are lazy and won't always go over to the discussion, and this will often leave the wrong impression (My "bug" from this week which is apparently already fixed for example).

The problem is that your "alerting people to bugs" requires a discussion to decide what really IS a bug and what not. Otherwise we have a lot of false alerts with "detached" discussions on why it's a false alert.

Just my opinion on the matter.

Shane.

Message Edited by shoneill on 06-09-2005 11:15 AM

Edited bacause of an inability to spell today.....

Message Edited by shoneill on 06-09-2005 11:16 AM

[tst]

If you will look at the beginning of the thread, you will see that it came to be because Ben (and some other people) don't have enough time to go through the forums and wanted to have a reader's digest version to make sure they don't miss the important things. This can only happen if this thread doesn't turn out to be like "enthusiasts 2", "The LIST" or any other of those big threads where people have multiple discussions which are very hard to follow.
A bug board is probably not a bad idea. The only problem I see is that here, unlike the LAVA forums, people have less self control and are more likely to shout "bug" for things which aren't really bugs or which have already been reported.
In short, for now, I think that posts in this thread should only point to existing threads about bugs so that people can see when there are new threads. The discussion shouldn't be carried out here. The amount of "false calls" (like the one I had this week, or Alten's one) should be minimal.