What are the main differences between Signal Express and Labview?

[altenbach]

---

Kabul wrote: I am not sure why the link did not work, but yeah the link you provided was the link I posted!

---

Your link was: ae.natinst.com/operations/ae/public.nsf/web/searchinternal/25a18738ff4ee1c88625730900694e03?OpenDocument
My link is:        digital.ni.com/public.nsf/allkb/25A18738FF4EE1C88625730900694E03

Your link still does not work for me. It might only work from within NI with access to internal nameservers. It seems that ae.natinst.com does not resolve using the nameserver of my ISP.

[K_Bull]

Hi,

Yes, both of those links have the same content but the one I posted is internal (me rushing and forgetting) and the one you posted is the one everyone can see.

Cheers for clarifying,

[F._Schubert]

Joining the discussion that evolved:
I would normally say, there's nothing you can't do in LabView, but I discovered some problems (I could not OR can't be) solved in LabView (7.1):

1. Make the MouseCursor disappear/invisible (LabView brings them back, I played with self made AcitiveX-Controls).

2. Get a data buffer that is returned as a pointer in return value at a dll call (some API calls do that, you need non-LabView code to handle that).
BUT I AM VERY HAPPY THAT LabView HAS NO POINTERS (shouting around the memory in my PC and popping up annoying error messages).

But at least: you should be able to do all that can be done using assembler, well theoretically...

And to the point of: should have common features like object-oriented: thats like expecting every human language should use 'our' alphabeth. Then look at the freaky, pictorial, iconic system they use in China and say: "that's not scripting".

Felix

[tst]

---

@f. Schubert wrote:

1. Make the MouseCursor disappear/invisible (LabView brings them back, I played with self made AcitiveX-Controls).

---

In Windows, you can do that very easily -

I expect I would do exactly the same in C.

I also wouldn't be surprised if you can load an empty cursor using the cursor VIs.