How To use or call dll ?????

[Ben]

Rolf wrote

"

Exception to this is the 3D graph which is a Component Works control incorperated into LabVIEW through the Active X control container (and my own private opinion about this control is that it sucks in several aspects, being an Active X control is not the least of its faults).
"

Hi Rolf,

I have learned a lot form you over the years and concider you one of my mentors. Second to the picture control, the CW 3d graph is one of my favorites.
So I am curious how I have managed to wonder so far from the from my guru.

Why do you not like the 3d graph?

Is there a better alternative available?

Ben

[rolfk]

---

Ben wrote:

Why do you not like the 3d graph?

Is there a better alternative available?

Ben

---

Why do I not like it? Call me conservative or whatever but I have a hard time to accept anything that has to do with Active X. It has many limits and is really a dynosour in many aspects such as resource consumption.
Active X controls do usually not support overlapping at all (although I do not advocate to use overlapping), won't work in remote front panels, and it is an extra thing which can and sometimes does go wrong.
Active X in the latest LabVIEW applications may be sort of mature now but it was a common reason in the past for crashing applications and alot of my application are supposed to run for weeks without interruption and a crash can sometimes cost lots of money to my customers.

When I checked out the 3D graph it also had some limitations which made it not really applicable for the possible needs that could have come up then. Since then I have not really had the need for a real 3D control anymore and the little I needed was just as well done in the Picture Control.

Last I'm a LabVIEW purist and multiplattform freak and controls that do not run as native controls and therefore won't be able to run on other platforms are for me most of the time not acceptable. For the same reason I try to avoid Active X based device drivers whenever possible.

And no, if you need an interactive 3D control then I'm afraid there isn't a real alternative. Back in LabVIEW 3.x days there used to be a Toolkit called SurfaceVIEW. It did provide sort of a LabVIEW native 3D control and was developed by a former LabVIEW developer (wouldn't really have been possible for someone else as it did use quite a lot of private LabVIEW functions and interfaces that were later partly removed from the exported interface in LabVIEW). Unfortunately that Toolkit went the way of many others and slowly died both from not being able to generate a revenue that would allow further development as well as NI removing the external control extension interface they had apparently supplied at that time).

Rolf Kalbermatter

Message Edited by rolfk on 01-19-2006 10:42 PM

[tst]

---

@rolfk wrote:

---

@tst wrote:

---

@Lycangeek wrote:
But you can't get a front panel control integrated into a VB.NET panel.

---

---

although I guess the Component Works developers did get some inspiration from LabVIEW controls but even more probably from LabWindows/CVI controls.

---

Well, since you don't like VB anyway, I assume you wouldn't really mind a VB developer working with ActiveX . I should hope that VB has significantly better integration with AX controls than LV, or Microsoft would be in some real trouble.

Anyway, I didn't say (or think) that LV controls were implemented through AX, just that LV style controls can be used in VB by means of the CW controls. Since I never really looked at them (no reason to), I didn't really know how many there were.

[rolfk]

---

@tst wrote:

Well, since you don't like VB anyway, I assume you wouldn't really mind a VB developer working with ActiveX . I should hope that VB has significantly better integration with AX controls than LV, or Microsoft would be in some real trouble.

Anyway, I didn't say (or think) that LV controls were implemented through AX, just that LV style controls can be used in VB by means of the CW controls. Since I never really looked at them (no reason to), I didn't really know how many there were.

---

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you again, but I think (and wish the developers) that Component Works was developed with Visual C 😉

Some of the limitations of Active X controls are by design of Active X so VB won't be able to do everything better than LabVIEW. The stability issue is a combination of the stability of the control or component, Active X/DCOM in Windows and the component container. Any bug in either of these parts will be able to crash your entire app (except out of process Active X components but they are very seldom and a control can't really be out of process).

And as far as the look and feel is concerned there are quite some differences between LabVIEW controls and Component Works controls.

And to get Component Works installed a LabVIEW installation won't help much so you would have to buy Component Works too.

Rolf Kalbermatter

[tst]

---

@rolfk wrote:

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you again

---

Probably.

OK, I don't know (or really care) what CW does. I just know that in my various tours through the AX controls I saw some of these too and they look very similar (some identical) to LV controls (which is one way the original question could be interpeted). I just checked now and I only have a few of these installed (and they seem to be in an evaluation mode) so that wouldn't really matter anyway.

I don't tend to use AX controls, unless I would really have a need to embed something like an Excel spreadsheet or an IE window in my FP.

In order to avoid completely wasting a post, here's a suggestion to the original poster - embed an ActiveX (what? ActiveX??? Who said that!?) internet browser window in your GUI and export the VI as a remote front panel (Tools>>Web Publishing Tool). Then you will be able to surf to that front panel.

[Nishant]

Hiiii,tst

         Can you please explain me what is G language behind the language and what is it's task exactly? and thanks for the answer to export the graphics of the LabVIEW, in another programs.

Thanks,

Nishant

[tst]

As you probably noticed, LabVIEW has programming abilities (loops, conditions, variables, functions etc.). In fact, LV is actually a compiler for a programming language called G, which probably stands for "graphical". The compiler takes your graphical code and translates it into a

set of instructions which the computer can understand. The same thing would happen with any other compiler - Visual C, for example, would take your textual code and translate it into a set of instructions the computer understands.

There are several differences between G and C, however. First, and most important, is that G is a data flow language and C is based on the order of the text. Another is that G was developed by NI and NI still has the patent for something (you don't want to go into that), which is why you don't see any other G compilers around. Also, the fact that NI has sole control over the language allows it to add new features to the language without having to worry about compatibility. You probably haven't heard the name before because NI doesn't go out of its way to publish it, probably because there is no need to.

[Nishant]

Thanks tst,

             If NI has the patent for it mean nobody can produce such kind of software with the G(graphical) language, so waht about MS Visual Studio,Visual Studio.NET, they dont have the patent, can anybody produce that kind of language? or it is patent for the compiler only or language only?

Thanks,

Nishant

[tst]

The reason I said you don't want to go into that is that it's complicated (I don't know the details myself and don't really care), but basically, the patent NI recieved is for a combination of several factors, which is basically the use of graphical icons to represent the interface and the code and the connection between those nodes. The validity of such a claim is not clear, but most people don't have the resources or will to fight a full legal battle to find out if the courts will really support it (although I'm sure the NI legal department can show you several cases in which the courts have "proved" their right to this patent). In any event, the first patents are due to expire in about a year and sometime after that we'll presumably be wiser. Also, I don't think NI has any obligation to release the G specification to anyone, as I don't think the language spec is what is covered by the patent.

Visual studio, as far as I know, is only "visual" in the GUI part, and not in the code. Isn't that so? I remember seeing something about some VS add-on which creates text code from a diagram which you build, but I think that's considered to be different.

If you really want, there was a long thread about this on the LAVA forums. Try searching it for "Bendrix Bailey" if you want to learn more.