Jump to content
Steen Schmidt

Support for LVLIBP?

Recommended Posts

Hi,

Are there any plans for including support for LVLIBP in VIPB? Currently VIPB does not recognize LVLIBP as a LabVIEW file. A package containing only a LVLIBP requires SYSTEM instead of a LabVIEW version as build target. Even worse is that you cannot create palettes in VIPB with LVLIBP entries in them. The proposed workaround to create wrapper VIs to include in the palettes, that place their content, is no use:

For proper documentation in the palettes such wrapper VIs must echo the conpane, terminal configuration, and VI Description as the LVLIBP VI it contains on its BD. But if you set this wrapper VI to place its content, all the wrapper VI's terminals will be placed in the caller as well. That won't work.

Why LVLIBP?

To do proper components in LabVIEW you need to use packed project libraries (PPL/LVLIBP). This is the only LabVIEW app build output that can be excluded from an executable, and thus the only component type that will alow patching of applications piece by piece. Source distributions cannot be excluded from executables for instance.

Cheers,
Steen

Edited by Steen Schmidt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Upon further investigation I can see that it's not possible to add components from a packed project library directly to a palette (LabVIEW itself does not support this).

Palettes containing LVLIBP methods/VIs has to be created in the original LVLIB. First you have an LVLIB, which you build an mnu-file for. This mnu-file you add to the LVLIB, and the entire thing can now be built into an LVLIBP with LabVIEW. Then it's possible to point LabVIEW at the mnu-file now embedded in the LVLIBP.

For this process to be entirely handled by VIPB, you'd have to add "build LVLIBP" into VIPB as well (since that part occurs inbetween defining the mnu-file and building the output vip-file).

Edited by Steen Schmidt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Steen, Thanks for the well thought out question/proposal. We've considered this at several points, yet there have always been very many considerations that make supporting LVLIBPs problematic. Unfortunately, NI did not have LabVIEW developers in mind when they designed LVLIBPs -- they were focused mostly on addressing internal use cases such as streamlining deployment to embedded targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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