Breaking a For-loop?

[Pierre Chatelier]

Hi everyone!

[LabView 6.0.2]
Let's imagine the simplest case where my problem happens:
I'm using a for-loop, with, let's say, 10 iterations.
There is just one VI inside, featuring error-stream (error-in and
error-out)
To use it well, I put a shift register to connect the error-input and
the error-output outside the loop.
Then, let's imagine that the VI inside the loop generates an error at
the 1st iteration. Is it possible to avoid the occurence of the 9 other
iterations?

Thanks in advance
Pierre Chatelier

[Helmut Hullen]

Hallo, Pierre,

Du (ktd) meintest am 01.06.02:

> Then, let's imagine that the VI inside the loop generates an error
> at the 1st iteration. Is it possible to avoid the occurence of the
> 9 other iterations?

Not within a "for"-loop.
Build a "while"-loop with an internal counter.
"while counter <10 and not abort
do

counter=counter+1
done

Sorry for no Labview picture ...

Greetings!
Helmut

Please excuse my gerlish!

[Pierre Chatelier]

> Hallo, Pierre,
>
> Du (ktd) meintest am 01.06.02:
>
> > Then, let's imagine that the VI inside the loop generates an error
> > at the 1st iteration. Is it possible to avoid the occurence of the
> > 9 other iterations?
>
> Not within a "for"-loop.
> Build a "while"-loop with an internal counter.
> "while counter <10 and not abort
> do
>
> counter=counter+1
> done
>
> Sorry for no Labview picture ...

Hello Helmut,
Thanks for your answer. I just wanted to be sure that the "While-loop"
is the only solution, because when I can use "For-loops", I really
prefer that ones, because I spare lots of wires and room on the diagram.

But that's ok, I will survive 😉

Thanks again

Pierre

[DougD]

Pierre Chatelier wrote in message news:<3CF9EE42.7BF5C3CF@club-internet.fr>...
> > Hallo, Pierre,
> >
> > Du (ktd) meintest am 01.06.02:
> >
> > > Then, let's imagine that the VI inside the loop generates an error
> > > at the 1st iteration. Is it possible to avoid the occurence of the
> > > 9 other iterations?
> >
> > Not within a "for"-loop.
> > Build a "while"-loop with an internal counter.
> > "while counter <10 and not abort
> > do
> >
> > counter=counter+1
> > done
> >
> > Sorry for no Labview picture ...
>

You could run a shift register through your for loop and put a case
box inside the for loop and wire up a boolean to the shift register to
act as an error line. OR t
he errors from the previous iteration with
the current and then put your working code on the false side of the
case box. This way if an error occurs, you would basically do nothing
but increment the for loop counter until you exit.

Doug DeClue
ddeclue@bellsouth.net

> Hello Helmut,
> Thanks for your answer. I just wanted to be sure that the "While-loop"
> is the only solution, because when I can use "For-loops", I really
> prefer that ones, because I spare lots of wires and room on the diagram.
>
> But that's ok, I will survive 😉
>
> Thanks again
>
> Pierre