Rube Goldberg Code

[Intaris]

---

@Yamaeda wrote:

Nice tweak to mine, haven't thought about Logical shift being able to take arrays. 😄

/Y

---

Yeah, but won't both be folded to equal constants in real code?

[altenbach]

---

@Yamaeda wrote:

Nice tweak to mine, haven't thought about Logical shift being able to take arrays. 😄

/Y

---

Well there is no real difference in diagram size, and the compiler might even generate the same code for both versions (not sure). 😄

A benchmark would be interesting... (Yes aboud folding by placing a control on N).

For truly gigantic arrays, the first version can be parallelized while the second version might be abe to take better advantage of SIMD instructions. (?)

[JÞB]

---

@altenbach wrote:

---

@Yamaeda wrote:

Nice tweak to mine, haven't thought about Logical shift being able to take arrays. 😄

/Y

---

Well there is no real difference in diagram size, and the compiler might even generate the same code for both versions (not sure). 😄

A benchmark would be interesting... (Yes aboud folding by placing a control on N).

For truly gigantic arrays, the first version can be parallelized while the second version might be abe to take better advantage of SIMD instructions. (?)

---

Not that likely.  Aren't rotations prohibited in SSE?

(Over my head here- but, allways learning!)

[altenbach]

---

@JÞB wrote:

Not that likely.  Aren't rotations prohibited in SSE?

---

 I have no idea, that's why I said "might". (here's a list of instructions, so I guess you are right)... 😉

[joaopam]

Hey guys.

As some people here know, I'm not that experienced in LabVIEW.
Some time ago I needed to do a function (subroutine) that had to split a string received from a serial buffer into several substrings. My token is a comma ( , ).

This is used to read sensors information from a certain firmware. As you can see below, I'd have to change the number of substrings (our firmware documentation provides that) in every single application (since this is a minor monitoring system, we use lots of them).

Before...

... and after ...

The thing here is:

I feel really stupid.
There's somehow to improve this new function (and make me feel more stupid)?

By the way, really nice thread. I was browsing the answers in a spare time yesterday, and I could see very good tips and tricks.

Regards

[GerdW]

Hi Joao,

what about using SpreadsheetStringToArray with a delimiter of ","?

[joaopam]

I don't see what you are pointing, exactly.

Can you please post a snippet? I'd be happy 😄

Regards

[crossrulz]

Like this.

[GerdW]

Hi Joao,

the point is that something little like that will split your string into smaller pieces:

[altenbach]

Well, if you want to retain the same functionality (cluster output!) use what I do in the top part.

(your code is at the bottom unchanged. Both give the same result)