LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

LabVIEW2012 has long execution time to write string than LabVIEW2011 on XP SP3

Why do you pipe the entire historic string through it?

Eli: I just want to know why there is difference between LabVIEW 2011 & LabVIEW 2012 on Chinese XP PCs. As you may know, I can simply solve this issue by following changes:

1. on Chinese XP, do not pipe the large historic string to front panel;

2. on Chinese XP, change source code back to version LabVIEW 2011;

3. with current LabVIEW 2012 source code, change language to English XP;

4. with current LabVIEW 2012 source code, just move to Win 7 PCs;

 

I already understand this 1 or 2 weeks ago, but still stuggle with this behavior with LabVIEW 2012.

 

I want to look at it.

Eli: for some reason, I can not post the entrie code here, but I did some cut in the attachment.


"I think therefore I am"
0 Kudos
Message 31 of 35
(134 Views)

The subVI is pasworded and cannot be inspected.

 

 


LabVIEW Champion Do more with less code and in less time
0 Kudos
Message 32 of 35
(122 Views)

lemon


"I think therefore I am"
0 Kudos
Message 33 of 35
(118 Views)

Thanks. I don't think I'll be able to troubleshoot that. So many cases, calls to the system console, ethernet, autoindexing while loops, tons of local and global variables.

 

In any case, I would not snake the ever-growing string through this subVI. Just output a boolean to decide if the new string needs to be appended or not and keep the big string on the toplevel. I doubt it wold solve your issues, though.

 

This looks like pretty old code. Do you know who write it?


LabVIEW Champion Do more with less code and in less time
Message 34 of 35
(106 Views)

 

Yes, this code was developed in 2008, many of my colleagues are involved in the development, but my boss have this idea at first.

 

I am thinking about the new test structure to replace it, do you have any suggestion?

 

Thanks!!

 


"I think therefore I am"
0 Kudos
Message 35 of 35
(101 Views)