ni.com is currently undergoing scheduled maintenance.
Some services may be unavailable at this time. Please contact us for help or try again later.
LabVIEW
How to convert boolean array to an numeric count array
I am having a array of Boolean consider the following example
My goal is to count the first LOW or HIGH values of array continuously and it should output the counted value . Then the next value is HIGH or LOW, it should count and display it to next.
For easy understand I can say diagrammatically which is given below
w
HIGH value count should be in positive and LOW value count should be in negative. The output is array. I think this is quite simple but I don't know the logic.
That was a fun little exercise. What I did was use a Feedback Node to look for a transition. If they were the same, I incremented a count. If they were different, I took the count and negated if the previous value was a false and then added it to an array. For the setup, I also added the inverse of the last value to the array to make sure there was a final transition to get the end of the array.
It was fun.
Here is what I came up with. The XOR with 1 cycle input delay finds the edges.
The conditional tunnel builds the array on the edges.
Since there is no last edge, I concantenated the counter after the loop finishes.
I'm a little surprised how tedious this task it but here is my attempt using array search. It will be interesting to see a side by side comparison of the different methods.
@aputman wrote:
I'm a little surprised how tedious this task it but here is my attempt using array search. It will be interesting to see a side by side comparison of the different methods.
@aputman wrote:
Oops....i just realized my code is wrong if the last boolean is a F. The count is not negated.
It is tedious. I had that same bug.
I think it is fixed now, although it is starting to feel a bit rube-ish.
This has to be a more elegant solution to the adding last counter problem... (creating the last edge)
@aputman wrote:
@WillD wrote:
I was stuck on using the negate function foolishly.
I hear you. Here is my updated version without negate.
Hope you don't mind but I found orders of magnitude improvement by removing the for loop, and replacing the while loop with a for loop. In my test running the code 10000000 times took about 8459ms to execute, but after these two changes took 2ms. I tried a few other ideas but couldn't come close to this. Oh automatic error handling and debugging was turned off for the test.
