I am quite positive that this is new to me, but it is an improvement. hope the R&D will do something to address this soon... not in the NXG of course 🙂
I don't know why people are still surprised when they figure out that LabVIEW 20XX will not get all of the features already done in NXG. NI has not been shy at stating that NXG will completely replace LabVIEW 20XX eventually. But we still have many years before that will happen because feature parity needs to be reached first. And NXG was a complete rewrite of the IDE in order to be able to handle many of these features that people have been begging for.
There are only two ways to tell somebody thanks: Kudos and Marked Solutions Unofficial Forum Rules and Guidelines "Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God" - 2 Corinthians 3:5
LV 20xx is still very much in focus and will be getting new features and bug fixes for the next several years, including some features that won't immediately be in LabVIEW NXG. LabVIEW NXG has 30+ years of LV 20xx code to catch up with. It's going to take a while. But we are not leaving LabVIEW 20xx to wither in the meantime. Channel wires, malleable VIs, lots of new stuff on the horizon. We are making decisions about what to do in 20xx and what to do in NXG on a case by case basis.
Naturally big changes will trigger resistance. Some thinks would need to change to make NXG useful for me (the tunnel vision to the code). But at the speed NXG is improving, it will be (very) good within a few years.
Am I wrong thinking that parts developed for NXG are actually used in CG (and vice versa)? Maybe not as API, but as shared code? Or at least the algorithms?
The compiler and runtime engine are shared between the two platforms. Nothing else is common. They don't even share a language base: One is written in C++. The other is written in C#.
Available in LabVIEW NXG. See the idea discussion thread for more information about Timed Loop behavior in LabVIEW NXG.