LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

INI file functions don't work in EXE on on some devices

Solved!
Go to solution

Yah, I see the potential problem.  See this guy here?

billko_0-1653725650216.png

Notice you don't have a shift register on the error and refnum wires on the FOR loop?  If autoindexing on an empty array, anything on the left side of the array will not appear on the right side unless you have shift registers.  The FOR loop may also be swallowing errors for the same reason.  Problem solved.  THAT is why you should've shared your code a LONG TIME AGO.

 

EDIT: Now you have to figure out why that array might be empty sometimes.  Wiring the error output of the Variant To Data may give you some clues.

 

Bill
CLD
(Mid-Level minion.)
My support system ensures that I don't look totally incompetent.
Proud to say that I've progressed beyond knowing just enough to be dangerous. I now know enough to know that I have no clue about anything at all.
Humble author of the CLAD Nugget.
Message 41 of 44
(149 Views)

NICE Bill!  What else does VIA SAY?

(posting by phone)

The old 0 iteration for loop bug. Even hiding any upstream errors as well as outputting "Not a Refnum"

 

I'm sure David will be able to take that back to his team at the bug of the month award ceremony.   


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
0 Kudos
Message 42 of 44
(136 Views)

I still can’t understand how many people come to these forums to describe an obscure behavior they see, asking for everyones input about if they know of a LabVIEW bug that could cause this but categorically “forgetting” to include the code in question. In 99% of the cases it is things like this that cause it and not an obscure LabVIEW bug and if the code would have been attached, we could probably have skipped most of the guessing 30 posts or so completely.

Rolf Kalbermatter
Averna BV
0 Kudos
Message 43 of 44
(130 Views)

@rolfk wrote:

I still can’t understand how many people come to these forums to describe an obscure behavior they see, asking for everyones input about if they know of a LabVIEW bug that could cause this but categorically “forgetting” to include the code in question. In 99% of the cases it is things like this that cause it and not an obscure LabVIEW bug and if the code would have been attached, we could probably have skipped most of the guessing 30 posts or so completely.


And forget to run VIA (yes, there is a test for that) 

I have to admit that I should have not just assumed a CLA did run the analysis and asked 30 posts ago.


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
0 Kudos
Message 44 of 44
(125 Views)