Error 1 Occurred At Dequeue Element
ForumsCategoryBoardDocumentsUsers turn on suggestions Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type. Showing results for Search instead for Did you mean: Reply Topic Options Subscribe to RSS Feed Mark Topic as New Mark Topic as Read Float this Topic to the Top Bookmark Subscribe Printer Friendly Page All Forum Topics Previous Topic Next Topic « Previous 1 2 3 Next » Error 1 with De-Queue on STOP? Re: Error 1 with De-Queue on STOP? [Edited] jcannon Active Participant 12-12-2012 07:30 PM - edited 12-12-2012 07:32 PM Options Mark as New Bookmark Subscribe Subscribe to RSS Feed Highlight Print Email to a Friend Report to a Moderator Hi RavensFan, Thanks for the reply... This makes sense... I will go back to queues. The vi I am working on will likely have up to 5-6 parallel while loops... So that will mean a total of4-5 queues just to send a STOP command to the consumder loops (one queue between the UE Loop and each consumer loop)? Is that correct? Surely there is a more efficient (less wiring)approach? Hence the idea to use a notifer; but I get the point re: CPU usuage. Can I cluster the queues or something? Attached is a vi that I previous developed that works well... What I am doing now is trying to improve this VI by using a more standard design pattern, include a UE loop for commands, and reduce all the uncessary wires... Ignore the missing subvis; they only do basic calculations on the data obtained (e.g. max, mean, get data array subset from between graph cursors, etc). Regards, Jack TMS Instrument [DO NOT DELETE].vi 1043 KB 0 Kudos Message 11 of 23 (873 Views) Reply 0 Kudos Re: Error 1 with De-Queue on STOP? [Edited] jcannon Active Participant 12-12-2012 07:32 PM - edited 12-12-2012 07:33 PM Options Mark as New Bookmark Subscribe Subscribe to RSS Feed Highlight Print Email to a Friend Report to a Moderator Thanks BillMe! That will be an easy fix.... Unfortunatley, I don't think my other
Sign in with Twitter Sign in with LinkedIn Sign Up All Content All Content This Topic This Forum Advanced Search Browse Forums Downloads Gallery Staff Online Users More Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started Search More More More All Activity Home Software & Hardware Discussions LabVIEW (By Category) Application Design & Architecture Strange Semaphore Behavior Sign in to follow this Followers 2 Strange Semaphore Behavior Started by theoneandonlyjim, May 12, 2010 9 posts in this topic theoneandonlyjim 0 Active Members 0 24 posts Version:LabVIEW 2011 Since:2005 Posted May 12, 2010 Some exposition before the https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/Error-1-with-De-Queue-on-STOP/td-p/2241884/page/2 question: I'm trying to restrict access to a tool using semaphores. In my top-level vi, I obtain the reference during my "Initialize" state and release it in my "Stop" state. The reference is untouched in any other state and resides in a shift register. When I pull the reference from the shift register, the "Release Reference" vi generates an error, saying the reference is invalid. I'm only to the point https://lavag.org/topic/12398-strange-semaphore-behavior/ of testing my top-level VI, so no other manipulation occurs. When instead I obtain the reference before my state machine loop begins (initializing the shift register), I don't get this error. I might be having a mental block, but it's not clear to me what the difference is between the two styles. What am I missing? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Minh Pham 9 Very Active Members 9 171 posts Location:Sydney Version:LabVIEW 2014 Since:2006 Posted May 12, 2010 Some exposition before the question: I'm trying to restrict access to a tool using semaphores. In my top-level vi, I obtain the reference during my "Initialize" state and release it in my "Stop" state. The reference is untouched in any other state and resides in a shift register. When I pull the reference from the shift register, the "Release Reference" vi generates an error, saying the reference is invalid. I'm only to the point of testing my top-level VI, so no other manipulation occurs. When instead I obtain the reference before my state machine loop begins (initializing the shift register), I don't get this error. I might be having a mental block, but it's not clear to me what the difference is between the two
LabVIEW Very much like notifiers, queues allow the user to send data from one loop to another. In the case of queues, we can send multiple commands, while notifiers can only send a single command. The key point is that a user can “queue” up multiple pieces of data in a FIFO (First-In First Out) manner. Queues also have built-in wait and error handling. This video illustrates the 4 functions associated with Queues: Obtain Queue, Dequeue Element, Enqueue Element, and Release Queue. They can also be used to separate the user interface from actions. This video is an excerpt from Enable’s LabVIEW Mastery online video-based training series, originally released in 2008. There have been several revisions of LabVIEW since then, and although the interface may not look exactly the same, the content of this video is still relevant and applicable. ~Ben Ben Zimmer is a Certified LabVIEW architect who has been programming since 1994. As president and owner of Enable Integration, Ben brings extensive experience in industry and in education, and committed to providing turnkey solutions for a wide variety of customers Tags: programming, tutorial ← LabVIEW Tutorial 34: Enum Driven State Machine LabVIEW Tutorial 36: Documentation → SearchIdeas for your own content? Contact Us. Name*Email*Company*Message*Please confirm that you are human:Send Recent PostsCase Study and Guest BlogIntroducing Enable, National Instruments...Integration Case Study: University of Wa...CategoriesEngineeringFIRST RoboticsIntegration SolutionsLabVIEWLEGOMindstormsNational InstrumentsNI Week 2010NI WEEK 2011NI Week 2012STEM EducationTETRIXUncategorized Copyright © 2016 [Enable Integration] | Enable Integration is a trademark of Enable Training and Consulting, Inc.