Presentation - Why LabView is better than C++

[PurpleOne]

Currently have a setup that has been use for almost ten years using LabView.  New members and manager came aboard that don't understand LabView so of course they want to change to language they understand.  Currently the process of giving presentation for the best method to use.

Testing environment consists of RF testing, measurement and analysis and basic command analysis (simple commands get back simple responses).  Testing equipment: Data Acquisition Units, Signal Generators, Power Meters, MXAs, Signal Analyzers,GPIB interface boxes, Cytec switch and others.

I would like some feed back as to the advantages that LabView has over C++ other methods.  

I am also going to propose adding TestStand to our current setup.

Thanks

[WG-]

The biggest advantage is I think development time and that people don't have to be an expert to understand it and to program in it.

It's really easy to develop a very handy and easy to use GUI and at the same time create some very intelligent program behind it. 

[smercurio_fc]

Please do a search on this forum. This question of comparison has come up many times and many comments have been made. Since you are asking on a LabVIEW board be aware that many of the comments will be pro-LabVIEW, so it may not be a balanced argument.

[TCPlomp]

One of my customers/colleagues always says 'I would do this in an evening with Pascal', to which I reply 'Why don't you?'

Ton

[smercurio_fc]

---

TCPlomp wrote:

One of my customers/colleagues always says 'I would do this in an evening with Pascal', to which I reply 'Why don't you?'

Ton

---

Perhaps Pascal was busy having dinner with a friend?

[Mark_Yedinak]

---

WouterG wrote:

The biggest advantage is I think development time and that people don't have to be an expert to understand it and to program in it.

It's really easy to develop a very handy and easy to use GUI and at the same time create some very intelligent program behind it. 

---

Depending on whether this is a simply one off utility that someone will play with for a short time or a large complex system that will be around for 10+ years, the "ease" of programming in LabVIEW can be a negative factor as well. The problem with NI's marketing standpoint of "anyone can program in LabVIEW" is that it misleads people to think that anyone can sit down and write quality code and large systmes with little or no training. Any sufficiently large and complex application will need experienced developers to design and architect a robust, quality system.

The Mars rovers had LabVIEW code running on them. (Not sure if all the code or part of the code was LabVIEW) I doubt NASA grabbed untrained people and said "do this is LabVIEW because because anyone can write LabVIEW programs".  I am quite confident their team was comprised of highlu trained developers.

[Ben]

In addition to teaching the official NI LabVIEW course we USED to teach the CVI course. The person who taught both courses would on occation be asked to quote a job in LV and C. his methodology was simple.

Estimate how long to do it in LabVIEW and then double it to estimate doing it in C.

I think that says a lot.

Ben

[WG-]

@Mark obvious you are totally right about what you say in your comment. But that is something I find quiet obvious because that is with all the things in life.

Btw. what is your source of the mars rover? I thought they where programmed with VxWorks and C. 

[Mark_Yedinak]

---

WouterG wrote:

Btw. what is your source of the mars rover? I thought they where programmed with VxWorks and C. 

---

NI. They publized the use of LabVIEW on the Mars rovers.

[lmtis]

---

Btw. what is your source of the mars rover? I thought they where programmed with VxWorks and C. 

---

I believe that LabVIEW was used for the earthside health monitoring system, not the embedded code on the rovers themselves.