LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

constant boolean on case structure falters exe building

I was just trying to build an executable, which just wouldn't build. Stating basically that my VI was broken, allthough it was not.

After raging and trying, I thought I'd remove a case structure set by a boolean constant. And it solved it!

However unwise it may be, the error should not occur or be much more to the point! It was tough debugging..

Using LV8.6 on XP

 

 

here's an example of the error:

Visit the Request Support page at ni.com/ask to learn more about resolving this problem. Use the following information as a reference:
Error 1502 occurred at AB_Source_VI.lvclass:Close_Reference.vi -> AB_Build.lvclass:Copy_Files.vi -> AB_Application.lvclass:Copy_Files.vi -> AB_Build.lvclass:Build.vi -> AB_EXE.lvclass:Build.vi -> AB_Engine_Build.vi -> AB_Build_Invoke.vi -> AB_Build_Invoke.vi.ProxyCaller
Possible reason(s):
LabVIEW:  Cannot save a bad VI without its block diagram.

0 Kudos
Message 1 of 4
(3,406 Views)

I don't think your description is enough to understand the problem, but I have a reasonable guess.

 

In general, LV 8.x does not build code which will not execute and that's by design, so if you want the code to go into the executable, you can use a control instead of a constant or include it explicitly in the build (either explicitly or by placing it in a non-running VI).

 

The error itself refers to a "bad VI", which as far as I know is a VI which is broken. I would guess that means you have VIs with required inputs there which you didn't wire.


___________________
Try to take over the world!
0 Kudos
Message 2 of 4
(3,373 Views)

Hi AartJan

 

can you supply a small example with that vi. I don't believe that you missed a broken vi so this really is a compiler bug.

greetings from the Netherlands
0 Kudos
Message 3 of 4
(3,358 Views)

The code is fine. The compiler should dismiss the unused cases since it knows at compile time what case will execute. The issue is that the builder trips over it with this fuzzy error message. I agree with Albert: this is a compiler issue.

Aart-Jan

0 Kudos
Message 4 of 4
(3,321 Views)