CSLUG - Central South LabVIEW User Group (UK)

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Modified “Continuous Measurement and Logging"

This is the modified “Continuous Measurement and Logging" code I showed at the end of my talk on March 22.   It makes three modifications to the LabVIEW 2015 original:

1) use of a private stack for executing sub-actions.

2) "error chaining" of sub-actions

3) synchronous request-reply communication from the main loop to stop the subloops, simplifying the application state diagram.

-- James

Message 1 of 9
(8,494 Views)

Thanks Matey,

I'll hold of publishing the video until after the CLA summit, if you like

Steve


Opportunity to learn from experienced developers / entrepeneurs (Fab,Joerg and Brian amongst them):
DSH Pragmatic Software Development Workshop


Random Ramblings Index
My Profile

0 Kudos
Message 2 of 9
(7,352 Views)

No need, publish it now.

PS> apparently MY posts don't need moderation.

0 Kudos
Message 3 of 9
(7,353 Views)

Here are my slides from the talk.

Message 4 of 9
(7,353 Views)

...and here is the talk from Berlin (on youtube):

 


 

 

0 Kudos
Message 5 of 9
(7,353 Views)

Note on the code:

This was the result of an hour or so of me modifying the NI template.  It's for illustration of the principles I talked about; do NOT use this as a template for actual projects. 

Personally, I use the "DEV template", which you can see by installing "Messenger Library" and selecting the Menu option "Tools>>Messenger Library>>Create Actor from Template" (a video).  This has the same features (private subAction stack, error chaining, and synchronous request-reply) but is something I have actually used in multiple real-world projects.

0 Kudos
Message 6 of 9
(7,353 Views)

Hi drjdpowell,

 

I like your idea of the action stack to prevent anyone from inserting states into a stack of grouped options. Do we need an extra queue (or in the case of your DEV template, a multi-line string)? Or would it be sufficient to make sure when we enqueue multiple states that we lock up the queue reference? (through a DVR or action engine, for example) 

 

0 Kudos
Message 7 of 9
(5,231 Views)

@Gregory wrote:

Hi drjdpowell,

 

I like your idea of the action stack to prevent anyone from inserting states into a stack of grouped options. Do we need an extra queue (or in the case of your DEV template, a multi-line string)? Or would it be sufficient to make sure when we enqueue multiple states that we lock up the queue reference? (through a DVR or action engine, for example) 

 


Sorry for not responding, I somehow missed this.

Locking the queue would block anyone trying to send us a message, so that isn't good.  You could get away from needing an extra thing to serve as your action stack by enqueuing on front of your queue.  You would want to make sure no external process can enqueue in front, only the message-handling loop itself.   Then your single queue is serving both as a queue of external messages and a stack of internal actions.

0 Kudos
Message 8 of 9
(3,303 Views)

I see, so you would reverse the order of your messages and then enqueue to the front of the queue? Now that I look at it this way, I think having a separate action stack is easier to follow.

0 Kudos
Message 9 of 9
(3,291 Views)