Message Edited by GerdW on 06-23-2006 01:58 PM
Unfortunately when using the pallette in conjunction with the FPGA module "add array elements" does not exist so the only way I could think of obtaining the total was to convert to a cluster. Also when I then converted to a cluster for some strange reason it would only produce a cluster of 8-9 elements hence my need to divide the shift register into A-H originally I just had a single shift register of 64 elements and used the add array elements fromthe numeric pallette to get the total but as mentioned this all went to pot when I tried to implement it using the FPGA module.
Thanks for that I though it was a bit strange that the cluster could not be resized properly. Unfortunately I am the reason for using the FPGA is that I require this vi to execute on a sub micro second time period so I don't think the use of the auto indexing for loop will work as it will delay the execution too much - am I correct in thinking this, I realise that unbuncling the cluster just to add the elements is very clumbersome but I think it may be nrequired.
My main sticking point, however, is the large array (1024 elements) whcih is used to delay the incoming signal and form a delayed strobe - can this be replaced with something more efficient i.e. FIFO so that the vi will compile in a reasonable time?
Your compilation time would be reduced by removing the conversion between arrays and clusters.
I have modified your code so as to maintain the same functionality but improve performance by avoiding array to cluster conversion.
I have attached the modified version of your code to this post, named "VimodImpl.vi".
I hope that this helps you.
I also was wondering if you could tell me what processor and size of memory you have on your compilation machine?
NIUK & Ireland
Many thanks for that it tidies up the vi a lot.
However, my major problem still stands and that is caused by the large array. I have now discovered that this will simply not compile without causing errors, hence my initial question as to if it was possible to replace these arrays with a FIFO? I will post more details when I can get a print out of the errors tomorrow.