Hello,

I wonder why LabVIEW doesn't get acceptance by other programmer. The most of people are sceptic if I say LabVIEW is assimilable to other programming languages. I find LabVIEW is very great and makes some things easier.
Why to drive bike if there are motorbike.

Greetings, Eugen

I totally agree with you Eugen, I often meet C/C++ "veterans" who've been doing more or less the same kind of project as I do and they concider that developing with LabVIEW is not really working... They say I'm doing nice drawings but not doing real professional job.
Maybe LabVIEW is just too accessible/time saving for them, I once challenged them to start from scratch a small app and see who gets it done first. In the end they argued that I was not "controlling things deeply as much as they do".
They pretend to be driving the Ferrarri (C/C++) against a New Beetle (LabVIEW).

For those (like me) who have never been behind Ferrarri (I mean a real one) steering wheel, I can tell you it requires a very long and specific training just to be able to move of 1 cm, and driving in town... don't think about it, it's a nightmare !
And it takes no more than 5 minutes for a normal driver to get use to a New Beetle.

I drove a Ferrari in our windtunnel, and you don't need that much time to learn... but you need a lot of time to earn...

Although I don't spend too much time wondering what other programmers think of me or the language I choose for developing in, I have encountered similar circumstances. People who work in C/C++ tend to have that disposition, Eugen. They are equally, if not more, critical of VB programmers. Their assertions are based on the idea that C/C++ requires you to build most aspects of your program from the 'ground up'. However, ask them what headers they use? Did they make the header or are they using something someone else did? Also, one of the great strengths of LabVIEW is that it is easy to make cross-platform applications. How often do they even attempt that in C/C++? When they do how much extra work is that?

There are definitely advantages to using C/C++ over LabVIEW. For example, the ability to make Win API calls that return STRUCT data types. LabVIEW will not always work with these data types (especially STRUCT data types that contain other STRUCT data types). However, the ease of development and handy tools to make development swift and reliable far exceed, in my opinion, other shortcomings.

Hi,
my colleague always laughs at LabVIEW. He says that I'm just painting pictures similar to powerpoint foils. He prefers HP Basic where he is "close to the hardware".
I'm glad that LabVIEW is close to the hardware so if have time to program the important things

Here a interesting statistic about programming languages:

http://www.tiobe.com/index.htm?tiobe_index

Eugen

Wow! LabView [sic] is #34 -- very cool!

At least LabVIEW beat ABC, Boo, MAD and Groovy!

Sometimes looks can be deceiving. I feel sorry for the ferarri driver who pulls up beside this New Beetle at a stoplight:

http://hpamotorsports.com/projects_finished_cannonbeetle.htm
http://www.motortrend.com/features/perform...kswagen_beetle/

J

Not to mention this one:
http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-ga...wered-vw-beetle
Herbert

In this sentense there are 2 point in favour of Labview:
1. the New Beetle is affordable by the masses
2. I doubt that one could drive the ferrarri with less gaz as the beetle.

Ouch! HP Basic! I thought that is dead for a long time. I have never been a fan of any Basic, but HP Basic was definitely not the best one I've seen.

Rolf Kalbermatter

I used basic on my first engineering project out of school, then was considering VB for then next when LabVIEW 2.5.2 came out on Windoze and I never looked back. Since then when I've used text based languages it has usually been only to provide some optimized code for LabVIEW to call (with one or two exceptions).

But HP Basic and Rocky Mountain Basic have been great friends of mine over the past 15 years, mainly by providing fertile ground for consulting projects to replace them with LabVIEW versions of the same application