CLD exam . using simple state machine will fail in exam

[26588360]

Hi ,

if we are using simple state machine in CLD exam without producer consumer statemachine, will we fail exam??

regards,

Ashok

[crossrulz]

No.  In fact, I still say that you can pass 99% of the CLD situations (all that I have seen) with a simple State Machine.

NI does not care that much about the architecture you used.  There are some design aspects to it, but if you get it to run with a large percentage of the requirements, you should pass.

[Hooovahh]

I agree, I did my CLD with a simple state machine, a QMH actually which is a template in LabVIEW that I used as a starting point.

[26588360]

THANK YOU.. for the reponspe

[crossrulz]

Actions speak louder than words.  To quote my signature: "There are only two ways to tell somebody thanks: Kudos and Marked Solutions"

[JÞB]

---

@26588360 wrote:

Hi ,

if we are using simple state machine in CLD exam without producer consumer statemachine, will we fail exam??

regards,

Ashok

---

The short answer: No, this is not an automatic failure.  

Longer Answer: A Simple state machine is a "Design Pattern" (And a powerful design pattern!) All of the exams and practice exams could be solved using a simple state machine.  I Won't say that that design pattern is allways the best choice (it often isn't)  Bare in mind that while sitting the exam you are demonstrating your grasp of programing fundamentals in the LabVIEW IDE.  This should include selecting an appropriate design pattern for the problem at hand and executing that design choice.  But, you have 4 hours.  Use what you feel comfortable using.

[Stuart.Parkinson]

In my exam preparation I did the sample exams several times using a variety of different architectures, and it soon became apparent which architecture suited which requirement best.

Initially my 'go-to' architecture had been the QMH using a separate event loop. That worked for one particuar sample exam, but doing it with a simple state machine was actually simpler and quicker to code (I was timing myself each time). On a different sample paper (with more UI interaction), the solution using the event loop was quicker to code.

All my solutions worked, and all would have passed, but I did not do them all within the 4 hour limit and so choosing the right architecture early on is vital. I definitely recommend doing each sample exam two or three different ways and then you really see the subtle differences in requirements which suit the different architectures.

In my actual exam I ended up using a simple state machine because it best suited the requirements I was given (I can't speak for the other papers, I know there are several different ones). I passed 🙂

[Fertek]

Useful answer! Thanks, I was concerned about this too, yesterday I did the ATM exam at home using my often preferred QMH, however it took me too much time to prepare the framework, I spent about 45 minutes until I started coding the requirements. Today I repeated the exam using the State Machine and it took me only 15 minutes to put together the architecture.

I am a bit confused, because I feel more confortable using the QMH, so I guess I need to get used to using the State Machine before my exam.

Thanks again 

[26588360]

Hi,

I am was mostly using QHM for my programmes while coding but simple state machine is saving time.

I have written my CLD with simple statmachine and was able to pass.

would only suggest is go with your strengths.

regards,

Ashok.

[Fertek]

I took the actual CLD exam 3 weeks ago. I left the exam room with a bittersweet feeling, since I was happy with what I had time to do, but I did not have time to get all the functionality covered (by far), so I was not too sure of what to expect.

Well, they gave me the marks today and, good news! I passed my CLD on my first attempt. I managed to hit 10 points in documentation and 15 points in Style so the functionality not been completed turned out not to be that much of a problem. This is a good example of what it has been said many times, if you put effort in style and documentation, a lot of the battle is already won!