Jump to content

Travis

Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Travis

  1. Does VIPM 2.0 get back to supporting Mac?
  2. Yep, with cross-platform clients, sometimes through proxies, easy for client users, potentially several clients connecting to the server simultaneously, to download and install device FW, or to notify of new application versions.
  3. How did you guys implement the VIPM feature for downloading updates online?
  4. How's the optimization coming?
  5. The work-around worked fine--thanks.
  6. What is required in the way of copyright notice and acknowledgement verbage when using a EasyXML in an application distributed? It has an "about box". Is it just the copyright info like I see in the VIPM 1.1 about box? If the info is in the license agreement, I was to bleary-eyed to find it. Thanks, Travis
  7. What will I have to do to get EasyXML working on the Mac? I don't see VIPM 1.1 for MacOS--will 1.0 do the job? If so... I tried installing VIPM 1.0 and I'm having trouble registering LabVIEW 8.5. I found that VI Server was not attached to any port in LabVIEW at first, but when I enabled it and rebooted things almost started working. In VIPM when I click the TCP/IP port Test button, it does successfully launch LabVIEW 8.5 (the only LV installed currently); however, I still get an error message in VIPM 1.0: "VIPM could not connect to No LV Version Selected. Another LabVIEW Version is at the specified port or path. Please claose all LabVIEW verions and try again. Also verify that each register LabVIEW verion is assigned a unique TCP\IP access port." I also tried a different port number with no luck. Thanks, Travis
  8. That's good news--sorry to cause the trouble. I'm looking forward to the upgrade when you are ready with it. Even at 8 seconds, a fill bar would be nice if there is an easy way to provide it as an option. Thanks, Travis
  9. How many machines can the single develop license be installed on? I've tried finding the answer in the docs but I'm not seeing it. I have 2 desktops and a laptop that I develop on and that's not counting the MacBook that I have to use for building the MacOS version of my app. Thanks, Travis
  10. Good news! I have already placed it in my application in hopes of a warp-speed version in the future. I parsed a 20 mile ride Sunday that was a 2.3 MB TCX file. That one cycled through 4 or 5 of the demo package dialog messages before it loaded all the way. It seems to be slowing down faster than linear with size, so I hate to imagine what the 100 mile, 10+ MB ride files will do later this spring. And I understand that I might be asking too much of a pacakge with "easy" in the name. I'm just hoping to be able to use it because it is so..... easy. I'm going to go ahead and order the package anyway because it is so enabling for smaller XML files that I'll actually start using XML format more for other applications. Thanks, Travis
  11. Here's something I thought I would throw out there. When I upgraded from 8.2.1 to 8.5, I found a wierd performance issue with 8.5 in one of my VIs. In 8.2.1 I had a VI where I used a case structure within two nested for loops that ran plenty fast; however, when I upgraded to 8.5 that same VI ran more than an order of magnitude slower. I coudn't find a good reason for it to happen. I tried recompiling and even tried making the VI from scratch again. The odd odd thing about this 8.5 performance issue is that it was a problem under both Windows and MacOS. I got around the issue by replacing the case structure with select node and drove on, but I made a note to go back and try to figure out what the deal was and never got around to it. I'm just bringing this up because it seems possible that your implementation might make use of case structures within nested loops. The easy way to see if this is the issue would be to check the execution speed in 8.2.1. I would do it myself, but I don't have it installed anywhere anymore. Travis
  12. Thanks for looking into the speed. I do like the functionality and it would be really nice to be able to use it in our application. Travis
  13. I'm doing some work right now where this XML tool would be very handy. I'm trying it out with the demo package, but I'm suffering some really slow execution speeds; like, we're talking 2 minutes to open a roughly 1 MB TCX file. For my application, this is a very small file. I tried splitting up the parsing into 2 separate chunks, but that didn't make a big enough difference. In my case, it took 2min 6s to execute the Easy Parse XML when doing the full parsing, and it still took 1min 42s to execute the method where I divided the task into two parts. Faster, but not nearly fast enough. Is there anything you can do in your implementation to speed up execution times? I would really like to use the EasyXML because it would save a lot of work and we have other XML-related things we would like to do. The attached VI is version 8.5 Thanks, Travis test_TCX_read.zip
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.