Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:57:48 +0100
From: Rene Tschaggelar
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, de-ch
Subject: Re: Learning electronics with LabView
References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <3DFB8F49.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
X-Abuse-Report: Send abuse reports to email@example.com
Organization: http://www.TeraNews.com - FREE NNTP Access
Eric Inazaki wrote:
> In article <3DFB8F49.firstname.lastname@example.org>, Rene Tschaggelar wrote:
>>Labview is an especially bad example.
>>As programming literate it was epecially frustrating
>>to spend days on trying to put wires through walls,
>>for trivialities that could have been solved with a
>>few lines of code.
> If all you're doing is "trivial" projects then maybe Labview isn't
> the best choice. But once you get past the initial adjustment in
> mindset, it becomes pretty easy (I'd like to say very easy) to scale
> up to more elaborate or sophisticated projects. Also, if you have a
> lot of experience in some other programming environment you probably
> won't see as much of a payoff in using Labview.
I never made it past trivialities, such as reading some values and
doing some calulations. Shortly after, they released LabWindows,
based on a C Compiler with all the libraries necessary to interface
to the various instruments. Thous I didn't try it, that's what I'd
recommend instaed of LabView.
LabView was designed for scientists not able to do some programming.
Here, programming experience is required. Be it with whatever.