LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Why aren't runtime librarys backwards compatable?

Why aren't runtime librarys backwards compatable?

 

It makes it a real P.I.A. to have to carry around several runtime librarys each being over 100MB when you are deploying an application.

 

Why can't say the LV 8.6 runtime be backwards compatable with LV 8.51 applications?

========================
=== Engineer Ambiguously ===
========================
0 Kudos
Message 1 of 2
(2,366 Views)

In order to load an older version, the VI needs to be recompiled and the run-time engine does not include the compiler. For that matter, the exe/dll does not include the source code required for a recompile.

 

In any case, I don't understand why you need to 'carry around several runtime libraries' in the first place. When you deploy a 8.5 application, for example, all that you need is the 8.5 run-time.  The only exception that I know of is with something like MAX. Some of the functions are written in LabVIEW and those functions may require a different run-time but that is included in the MAX installer. Can you give an example where you need multiple run-times?

 

I also don't see each run-time being that large. The 8.6 run-time is a little less than 100Mb (on my XP machine) once it's installed. The older ones are much smaller and the actuall installers for the run-times are quite a bit smaller.

Message 2 of 2
(2,356 Views)