10-01-2007 01:54 PM
10-01-2007 01:59 PM
10-01-2007 02:04 PM
10-01-2007 02:18 PM
10-01-2007 02:18 PM
10-01-2007 03:20 PM
Hi
remenankb,
I am still a little confused as to what works and what doesn't. So in LabVIEW
8.5, if you
1) Add your VI that uses a .NET assembly to a LabVIEW project
2) Move your .NET assemblies to the same directory as the project or a
subdirectory
3) Open the VI and try and browse for the constructor via the .NET Constructor
Node
Does that work? This should work.
Our end goal with regards to .NET integration is follow the .NET model in terms
of how assemblies are located and where they should be placed. The .NET
CLR requires that assemblies live either in the GAC or the same directory,
or subdirectory of the application so that it can locate them at
run-time. LabVIEW addresses this requirement by creating a separate AppDomain
for the LabVIEW project and setting the AppBase to the home directory of the
LabVIEW project. This allows the .NET CLR to locate the assemblies. That
is why we recommend using LabVIEW projects. You can find out more
information on how LabVIEW finds assemblies in the help topic Using .NET
with LabVIEW.
Now in LabVIEW 8.5, we did change a few things (i.e. trying to move closer to
.NET model) underneath with regards to our loading mechanisms. If you
have been using LabVIEW projects already and putting your private assemblies in
the locations I mentioned (i.e. project directories), you should have been
fine. If you are not, I am sorry for the inconvenience.
Now if these suggestions don't work, I would be happy to try out loading your
assemblies on my side. I want to make sure our .NET integration is a smooth as
possible.
Hopefully this makes some sense.
Best Regards,
10-02-2007 09:22 AM
I found out what is causing the main issue.
If I have the Dlls in the same directory on disk as the project then the constructors will load. But if the project (.lvproj) file is in a directory above the Dlls (mine was 4 directories higher) then the constructors dont load.
10-02-2007 11:12 AM
10-02-2007 11:19 AM
10-02-2007 11:26 AM