How to avoid a re-save request by VI's every a type library changes

[Tattva]

We have LabVIEW VI's that import a COM component via its type library.  The component is re-compiled every night as part of a nightly build process, but the VI's are part of a different build process and are re-compiled much less frequently.  The type library is embedded in the COM component's DLL as a resource.

Every time the COM component is re-compiled (or its file date changes via a copy, delete original, rename copy to original operation in Windows Explorer) and we open the VI in LabVIEW, the VI is marked with an asterisk to indicate that it has changed and it wants to be saved again, etc.

Is there any way to turn off this behavior?  Shouldn't the VI's consult the type library version (or at least a hash of the tlb contents if you don't trust type library vendors to bump version numbers) when determining whether a re-compile is necessary?

[tst]

---

Tattva wrote:

Shouldn't the VI's consult the type library version (or at least a hash of the tlb contents if you don't trust type library vendors to bump version numbers) when determining whether a re-compile is necessary?

---

Perhaps it should (I don't have enough experience with COM to tell), but I doubt NI would change this now, as COM isn't exactly all the rage any more.

Here are two relevant suggestions:

1. Make the VIs read-only and enable the "Ignore automatic changes..." in the LabVIEW options (or whatever it's called. I believe it should be in the Misc. page in the newer versions). This is meant for working with SCC systems, but should presumably also apply here. The VIs will recompile each time, because you don't save them, but they won't prompt you to save them.
2. There have been some hints thrown around about an improvement being made in this area and NI is currently starting a beta for the next version. You can register for that beta to see if the situation has improved there.

[Tattva]

@tst, Thanks, I'll pass that on to the engineer responsible for the VI's and I'll mark this as the answer if anything you've suggested leads to a solution.

Dave