|
Sagebrush posted:here is a picture of some labview data collection abomination designed by a mechanical engineer. it's not my photo so i don't know much about it, other than to say that in academia i have often had to use similar pieces of homespun labview software, and being forced to by your supervisor or professor should be considered a cruel and unusual punishment. I'm currently dealing with a poo poo ton of LabVIEW software designed and built by a mechanical engineer and it is a colossal mess. Not only is it in daq system (which sorta makes sense) but then the entire data processing chain is built in labview as well. Nothing works quite right and trying to dig into anything is a nightmare because it's all literal spaghetti code built by a single overworked employee with no formal software training.
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2022 21:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 00:45 |
|
|
I'm back to bitch about LabVIEW ux. This is a graphical programming language that doesn't support zooming in and out. Want to be able to read the label on a function block or be able to tell which signal wire is actually routed to which input? Lol gently caress you, you either gotta get a magnifying glass or step down your monitor resolution. There's a thread in the National Instruments user forum where the developers admit that the ability to zoom is one of their most requested features since 2004. Their reasoning started as "it would encourage bad programming habits to be able to zoom out" and eventually they admitted that their programming logic is too intertwined with the display code to do an easy update from raster to vector graphics. They implemented zoom into a separate programming suite that they were going to support in parallel with their main environment maybe 3 years ago. Of course they discontinued the new development environment within a couple of years so no more zoom. They say that now they're working on it. tl:dr NI has been kicking the can down the road wrt the ability to zoom for almost two decades now. They spent years telling the users it's because they can't be trusted with it and we don't really need it. They eventually admit they don't want to do it because they don't have a proper boundary between their UI and business logic.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2022 21:26
|
|
|
AnimeIsTrash posted:I used it in high school and it was so bad. It was completely undecipherable you had a large program. The other fun thing is that it's basically impossible to do revision comparisons. I've got pages and pages of exactly this written over the course of the last 10 years that I'm now responsible for.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2022 05:46
|
|
|
Ladder logic hits a nice sweet spot for visual programming. It can always be decomposed into equivalent text pretty easily. It is more limited in its flexibility compared to labview or simulink, but it's still really useful for programming complex bit logic in a format that's more intuitive to interpret.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2022 21:59
|
|