George Gatling (Contractor) wrote: > but I am still latched on to the idea of moving the updates into > their own sub-hierarchy and out of the top level. This will incur > the by reference performance hit, but for now that is not a big deal > for me as I only need about 0.5 updates/sec. And when the time comes > that I need better performance I expect NI will have sped up the > reference operations ;)
I'm coming to the end of a fairly slow application and the GUI code, which is essentially a bunch of radio buttons and a multiline string, is in a sub-VI fed just with a reference to the tab control on the front panel. It works well and the top level is nice and compact. It's rather nice that in principle the tab reference lets you get the control references to all the controls in the selected tab, but I don't know if there's any point to referencing on the fly rather than opening everything during initialisation. My experience with the XY graph that I mentioned was in Labview 6. I wonder if using sub panels for data intensive parts of the UI would perform better whilst maintaining the abstraction. I did a quick test today and got a pair of waveform graphs in two different subpanels updating pretty quickly, but I didn't get any numbers. It was a "can I do this" exercise rather than a performance comparison. -- Dr. Craig Graham, Software Engineer Advanced Analysis and Integration Limited, UK. http://www.aail.co.uk/
