LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Insance object

Hi community
 
I'm revising an application. After some modifications LV started giving the attached error when saving some of the vis.
 
I found an older thread about this topic, which said to copy the code into a new vi - but this did not help.
 
The big problem is, that I can reproduce this error on the top-level vi. Maybe there are subvis, but open all of them, make a change and save them takes an endless time.
 
Is there one out there who can help me?
 
Thomas
Using LV8.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't be afraid to rate a good answer... 😉
--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 Kudos
Message 1 of 9
(3,142 Views)

hi there

the only thing that once helped me out was to remove the last code i wrote until the error vanished. after that i rewrote the code by hand (NO copy-paste!). In your case i would start with PSMining.vi. if this vi is rather small it's probably faster to rewrite it from the start (or use a backup copy).
 
 
Best regards
chris

CL(A)Dly bending G-Force with LabVIEW

famous last words: "oh my god, it is full of stars!"
Message 2 of 9
(3,135 Views)
Hm - doing as you say I meet the following problems:
1. PSMining.vi is my toplevel vi - write it again from the start seems not to be a reasonable way unless there is really no other solution
2. Remove the last code - I've gone to far to remember what I've changed
 
Using LV8.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't be afraid to rate a good answer... 😉
--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 Kudos
Message 3 of 9
(3,132 Views)

have you any backups? if so you could compare the backup and the current version to find the differences (Tools->Compare->Compare VIs).

or post the VIs. perhaps a wonder happens and the VIs can be masscompiled on another platform.

Best regards
chris

CL(A)Dly bending G-Force with LabVIEW

famous last words: "oh my god, it is full of stars!"
0 Kudos
Message 4 of 9
(3,132 Views)

Oh what a wonder - obviously I got it working. Yesterday I inserted three new type definitions.

After realising that the error occured thrice, I thought that I may find the problem there. I deleted the controls of these type defs in PSMining, inserted new ones and now it seems to work.

Thanks for your help - sometimes one just need a kick in the *** to start thinking in the right way... Smiley Very Happy

Thomas

Using LV8.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't be afraid to rate a good answer... 😉
--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 Kudos
Message 5 of 9
(3,124 Views)

Hi Becktho,

Can you share with us what was different from your previous type defs to the new ones?  It would be nice to get to the bottom of the insane object issue.  And maybe provide a more... euh... logical... advice in the future.. 🙂

JLV

Message 6 of 9
(3,111 Views)

Hi JLV

Actually der was no real difference. As I said I created three strict type defs and stored them in an llb. I inserted them as controls in the top level vi. Sometime afterwards (I can't tell if it was right after inserting them or later) I got the error.

Now what I did is just delete this three controls from the top level vi and insert them again. Now the error is gone - but there was no change to the type defs - just delete and insert again.

Thomas

Using LV8.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't be afraid to rate a good answer... 😉
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Message 7 of 9
(3,095 Views)

Hi Thomas,

It does appear that LV somehow looses track of the vi's within the block diagram and declares them as insane.

Although I haven't seen this in a long while, I was hoping to capture what causes this in the hopes of having a more logical solution rather than copy / paste the entire vi, or undo / redo the last steps.  I originally thougth it was caused by C/P pieces of vi's to create a new one..

The mystery continues...

JLV

Message 8 of 9
(3,083 Views)

...but each piece of the puzzle shows the picture of the solution a little bit better.

I can't imagine why it happened - but anyway - work can go on and I don't have to recode my vis (lucky me Smiley Wink).

Thomas

Using LV8.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't be afraid to rate a good answer... 😉
--------------------------------------------------------------------
0 Kudos
Message 9 of 9
(3,079 Views)