AnsweredAssumed Answered

vrf Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

Question asked by VRFuser on Oct 30, 2003
Latest reply on Nov 3, 2003 by VRFuser

Like • Show 0 Likes0
Comment • 42

>> They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded.

> When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed
forces)
> writes programs anymore. We all write applications.

While this is true, a VEE "program" is then an application written on top of
an
application that is written on the operating system program - that is, there
is
an extra layer in there. While we may have faith in VEE, our customers may
not.
When they see strange .vxe file names they may be concerned about the long
term
viability of the product. I have computer games (.exe files) written in DOS
that
run unmodified on a WinXP command prompt. Does a .vxe hold the same
promise? It
might, but how do we assure or customers of that?

Les Hammer

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

No one else has this question

Outcomes

42 Replies

mrgold Oct 30, 2003 1:46 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD><META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252"><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1264" name=GENERATOR><STYLE>@page Section1 {size: 612.0pt 792.0pt; margin: 72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; }P.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}LI.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}DIV.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}A:link { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}SPAN.MsoHyperlink { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}A:visited { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}P.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}LI.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}DIV.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}SPAN.EmailStyle17 { COLOR: windowtext; FONT-FAMILY: Arial}DIV.Section1 { page: Section1}</STYLE></HEAD><BODY lang=EN-GB vLink=purple link=blue bgColor=#ffffff><DIV>The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE would make VEE competative with Lab View, and be a big plus. I have actually lost jobs for that reason..</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Mark</DIV><BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left>-----Original Message----- From: Paulo de Tarso [mailto:ptarso@wnetrj.com.br] Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 5:26 PM To: VEE vrf Subject: [vrf] Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> Hello somebody from Agilent,<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> I endorse the same subject.<o:p></o:p> I have almost exactly the same problem.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Regards<o:p></o:p></DIV> <DIV>Paulo de Tarso</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Star One Satellites - Embratel</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Rio de Janeiro Brazil</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black">From: <A title=Nick@genesysibs.com href="mailto:Nick@genesysibs.com">Nick Evans</A> </DIV> <DIV>To: <A title=vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com href="mailto:vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com">VEE vrf</A> </DIV> <DIV>Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:47 AM</DIV> <DIV>Subject: [vrf] Agilent Vee Pro 7</DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV class=Section1> Dear All Does anybody know if there is any released information on new features and availability for Vee Pro 7.0 yet? The reason for asking is that we are just about to commit to a software development language for new projects through 2004. We are under pressure to move away from Vee Pro completely for these projects and use something more traditional like Microsoft .net. The main reason for this is that our test and measurement applications are supplied to end user customers to run on their own computers and the perception is that they need something that looks and feels more like a traditional windows application than is achievable with Vee Pro. I am interested to know if there are any radical changes in Vee Pro 7.0, in particular with the user interface options and runtime distribution options that we should know about. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks and best regards Nick </DIV>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: ptarso@wnetrj.com.br To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 27/10/2003 --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: mrgold@pacbell.net To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". </BLOCKQUOTE>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
mrgold Oct 30, 2003 1:46 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD><META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252"><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1264" name=GENERATOR><STYLE>@page Section1 {size: 612.0pt 792.0pt; margin: 72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; }P.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}LI.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}DIV.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}A:link { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}SPAN.MsoHyperlink { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}A:visited { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}P.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}LI.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}DIV.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}SPAN.EmailStyle17 { COLOR: windowtext; FONT-FAMILY: Arial}DIV.Section1 { page: Section1}</STYLE></HEAD><BODY lang=EN-GB vLink=purple link=blue bgColor=#ffffff><DIV>The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE would make VEE competative with Lab View, and be a big plus. I have actually lost jobs for that reason..</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Mark</DIV><BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left>-----Original Message----- From: Paulo de Tarso [mailto:ptarso@wnetrj.com.br] Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 5:26 PM To: VEE vrf Subject: [vrf] Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> Hello somebody from Agilent,<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> I endorse the same subject.<o:p></o:p> I have almost exactly the same problem.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Regards<o:p></o:p></DIV> <DIV>Paulo de Tarso</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Star One Satellites - Embratel</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Rio de Janeiro Brazil</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black">From: <A title=Nick@genesysibs.com href="mailto:Nick@genesysibs.com">Nick Evans</A> </DIV> <DIV>To: <A title=vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com href="mailto:vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com">VEE vrf</A> </DIV> <DIV>Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:47 AM</DIV> <DIV>Subject: [vrf] Agilent Vee Pro 7</DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV class=Section1> Dear All Does anybody know if there is any released information on new features and availability for Vee Pro 7.0 yet? The reason for asking is that we are just about to commit to a software development language for new projects through 2004. We are under pressure to move away from Vee Pro completely for these projects and use something more traditional like Microsoft .net. The main reason for this is that our test and measurement applications are supplied to end user customers to run on their own computers and the perception is that they need something that looks and feels more like a traditional windows application than is achievable with Vee Pro. I am interested to know if there are any radical changes in Vee Pro 7.0, in particular with the user interface options and runtime distribution options that we should know about. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks and best regards Nick </DIV>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: ptarso@wnetrj.com.br To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 27/10/2003 --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: mrgold@pacbell.net To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". </BLOCKQUOTE>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 4:10 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><html><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10 (filtered)"><style></style></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=Section1>Mark: Can you help me understand why thecustomer insisted on generating an EXE? Even with LabVIEW .exe files you stillhave to install the LabVIEW runtime support dll’s. In my mind (no jokesplease) a .vxe file and the VEE runtime is essentially the same thing as aLabVIEW .exe and their DLL’s. Thanks, Ken <spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Goldberg[mailto:mrgold@pacbell.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 20036:47 PM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent VeePro 7<spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt'> <div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>The ability togenerate an EXE instead of a VXE would make VEE competative with LabView, and be a big plus. I have actually lost jobs for that reason..</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Mark</div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>-----Original Message-----
From: Paulo de Tarso [mailto:ptarso@wnetrj.com.br]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 20035:26 PM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] Fw: Agilent Vee Pro7<div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>Hello somebody from Agilent,<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>I endorse the same subject.<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>I have almost exactly the same problem.<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>Regards</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>Paulo de Tarso</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>Star One Satellites - Embratel</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>Rio de Janeiro Brazil</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>----- Original Message----- <div style='font-color:black'>From:<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> <ahref="mailto:Nick@genesysibs.com" title="Nick@genesysibs.com">Nick Evans</a> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>To:<fontsize=2 face=Arial> <ahref="mailto:vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com" title="vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com">VEEvrf</a> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>Sent:<fontsize=2 face=Arial>Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:47 AM</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>Subject:<fontsize=2 face=Arial>[vrf] Agilent Vee Pro 7</div></div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Dear All<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Does anybody know ifthere is any released information on new features and availability for Vee Pro7.0 yet?<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>The reason for asking isthat we are just about to commit to a software development language for newprojects through 2004. We are under pressure to move away from VeePro completely for these projects and use something more “traditional” likeMicrosoft .net. The main reason for this is that our test andmeasurement applications are supplied to end user customers to run on their owncomputers and the perception is that they need something that looks and feelsmore like a traditional windows application than is achievable with Vee Pro.<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>I am interested to knowif there are any radical changes in Vee Pro 7.0, in particular with the userinterface options and runtime distribution options that we should know about.<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Any info would beappreciated.<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Thanks and best regards<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Nick<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'>---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: ptarso@wnetrj.com.br
To subscribe send a blank email to"join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to"leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 27/10/2003<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'>---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: mrgold@pacbell.net
To subscribe send a blank email to"join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to"leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email"vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". </blockquote><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'>---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: ken_colasuonno@agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to"join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to"leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email"vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</div>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></html>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 4:10 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><html><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10 (filtered)"><style></style></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=Section1>Mark: Can you help me understand why thecustomer insisted on generating an EXE? Even with LabVIEW .exe files you stillhave to install the LabVIEW runtime support dll’s. In my mind (no jokesplease) a .vxe file and the VEE runtime is essentially the same thing as aLabVIEW .exe and their DLL’s. Thanks, Ken <spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Goldberg[mailto:mrgold@pacbell.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 20036:47 PM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent VeePro 7<spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt'> <div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>The ability togenerate an EXE instead of a VXE would make VEE competative with LabView, and be a big plus. I have actually lost jobs for that reason..</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Mark</div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>-----Original Message-----
From: Paulo de Tarso [mailto:ptarso@wnetrj.com.br]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 20035:26 PM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] Fw: Agilent Vee Pro7<div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>Hello somebody from Agilent,<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>I endorse the same subject.<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>I have almost exactly the same problem.<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>Regards</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>Paulo de Tarso</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>Star One Satellites - Embratel</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>Rio de Janeiro Brazil</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>----- Original Message----- <div style='font-color:black'>From:<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> <ahref="mailto:Nick@genesysibs.com" title="Nick@genesysibs.com">Nick Evans</a> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>To:<fontsize=2 face=Arial> <ahref="mailto:vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com" title="vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com">VEEvrf</a> </div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>Sent:<fontsize=2 face=Arial>Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:47 AM</div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold'>Subject:<fontsize=2 face=Arial>[vrf] Agilent Vee Pro 7</div></div><div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Dear All<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Does anybody know ifthere is any released information on new features and availability for Vee Pro7.0 yet?<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>The reason for asking isthat we are just about to commit to a software development language for newprojects through 2004. We are under pressure to move away from VeePro completely for these projects and use something more “traditional” likeMicrosoft .net. The main reason for this is that our test andmeasurement applications are supplied to end user customers to run on their owncomputers and the perception is that they need something that looks and feelsmore like a traditional windows application than is achievable with Vee Pro.<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>I am interested to knowif there are any radical changes in Vee Pro 7.0, in particular with the userinterface options and runtime distribution options that we should know about.<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Any info would beappreciated.<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Thanks and best regards<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Nick<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'> <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'>---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: ptarso@wnetrj.com.br
To subscribe send a blank email to"join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to"leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". <spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:10.0pt'>---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 27/10/2003<spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'>---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: mrgold@pacbell.net
To subscribe send a blank email to"join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to"leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email"vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". </blockquote><spanlang=EN-GB style='font-size:12.0pt'>---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: ken_colasuonno@agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to"join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to"leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email"vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</div>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></html>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
ptarso Oct 30, 2003 7:26 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252"><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1264" name=GENERATOR><STYLE>@page Section1 {size: 612.0pt 792.0pt; margin: 72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; }P.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}LI.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}DIV.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}A:link { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}SPAN.MsoHyperlink { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}A:visited { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}P.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}LI.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}DIV.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}SPAN.EmailStyle17 { COLOR: windowtext; FONT-FAMILY: Arial}DIV.Section1 { page: Section1}</STYLE></HEAD><BODY lang=EN-GB vLink=purple link=blue bgColor=#ffffff><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Hello somebody from Agilent,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>I endorse the same subject.<o:p></o:p>I have almost exactly the same problem.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>Regards<o:p></o:p></DIV><DIV>Paulo de Tarso</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Star One Satellites - Embratel</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Rio de Janeiro Brazil</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black">From: <A title=Nick@genesysibs.com href="mailto:Nick@genesysibs.com">Nick Evans</A> </DIV><DIV>To: <A title=vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com href="mailto:vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com">VEE vrf</A> </DIV><DIV>Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:47 AM</DIV><DIV>Subject: [vrf] Agilent Vee Pro 7</DIV></DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV class=Section1>Dear All Does anybody know if there is any released information on new features and availability for Vee Pro 7.0 yet? The reason for asking is that we are just about to commit to a software development language for new projects through 2004. We are under pressure to move away from Vee Pro completely for these projects and use something more traditional like Microsoft .net. The main reason for this is that our test and measurement applications are supplied to end user customers to run on their own computers and the perception is that they need something that looks and feels more like a traditional windows application than is achievable with Vee Pro. I am interested to know if there are any radical changes in Vee Pro 7.0, in particular with the user interface options and runtime distribution options that we should know about. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks and best regards Nick </DIV>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: ptarso@wnetrj.com.br To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 27/10/2003 --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
ptarso Oct 30, 2003 7:26 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252"><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1264" name=GENERATOR><STYLE>@page Section1 {size: 612.0pt 792.0pt; margin: 72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; }P.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}LI.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}DIV.MsoNormal { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}A:link { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}SPAN.MsoHyperlink { COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}A:visited { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed { COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline}P.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}LI.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}DIV.MsoAutoSig { FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0cm 0cm 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"}SPAN.EmailStyle17 { COLOR: windowtext; FONT-FAMILY: Arial}DIV.Section1 { page: Section1}</STYLE></HEAD><BODY lang=EN-GB vLink=purple link=blue bgColor=#ffffff><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Hello somebody from Agilent,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>I endorse the same subject.<o:p></o:p>I have almost exactly the same problem.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>Regards<o:p></o:p></DIV><DIV>Paulo de Tarso</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Star One Satellites - Embratel</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Rio de Janeiro Brazil</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black">From: <A title=Nick@genesysibs.com href="mailto:Nick@genesysibs.com">Nick Evans</A> </DIV><DIV>To: <A title=vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com href="mailto:vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com">VEE vrf</A> </DIV><DIV>Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:47 AM</DIV><DIV>Subject: [vrf] Agilent Vee Pro 7</DIV></DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV class=Section1>Dear All Does anybody know if there is any released information on new features and availability for Vee Pro 7.0 yet? The reason for asking is that we are just about to commit to a software development language for new projects through 2004. We are under pressure to move away from Vee Pro completely for these projects and use something more traditional like Microsoft .net. The main reason for this is that our test and measurement applications are supplied to end user customers to run on their own computers and the perception is that they need something that looks and feels more like a traditional windows application than is achievable with Vee Pro. I am interested to know if there are any radical changes in Vee Pro 7.0, in particular with the user interface options and runtime distribution options that we should know about. Any info would be appreciated. Thanks and best regards Nick </DIV>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: ptarso@wnetrj.com.br To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 27/10/2003 --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 11:14 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
> The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE

I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:

Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?

The answer was:

No.

The representatives present explained that they felt that emulation was not
such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
"compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the "pseudo-machine", which is
emulated by the VEE runtime.

The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it *does* run on
any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is installed on
the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
(theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime is installed.
Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of architectures too, and
as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will (theoretically)
run on those machines as well.

This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted language. No matter
how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In my mind (no
jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.

Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler, but I have to
admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting to be less and
less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant future, the
point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure themselves to suit
our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.

Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86 executable will always
be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant questions are
"what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of programming facilities
do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything, and don't forget
it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have always been
attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see results. You
can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.

When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a demonstration of
functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much! The hell with UI
perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO. Once that's
signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the customer does make
some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd rather dive in
right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
rather than say "same time, same place, next week."

I regularly use a few different languages for different purposes, but so far
VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to test-bed ideas,
and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure don't deliver
applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually sit down and
brainstorm with it.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 11:14 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
> The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE

I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:

Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?

The answer was:

No.

The representatives present explained that they felt that emulation was not
such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
"compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the "pseudo-machine", which is
emulated by the VEE runtime.

The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it *does* run on
any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is installed on
the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
(theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime is installed.
Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of architectures too, and
as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will (theoretically)
run on those machines as well.

This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted language. No matter
how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In my mind (no
jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.

Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler, but I have to
admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting to be less and
less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant future, the
point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure themselves to suit
our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.

Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86 executable will always
be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant questions are
"what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of programming facilities
do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything, and don't forget
it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have always been
attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see results. You
can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.

When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a demonstration of
functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much! The hell with UI
perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO. Once that's
signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the customer does make
some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd rather dive in
right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
rather than say "same time, same place, next week."

I regularly use a few different languages for different purposes, but so far
VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to test-bed ideas,
and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure don't deliver
applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually sit down and
brainstorm with it.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
mark.goldberg Oct 30, 2003 3:46 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Shawn,

I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still lacks
some simple requirements. I have lost jobs because of the interpreter
loading requirements. One such case was going to replace a DOS program
control for low cost model type CNC machines. They did not like the fact
that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded. Another was one where a company
used all of its old machines to run auto test and in some cases interpreting
was to slow. Some of these things missing have already been posted, but here
are some of the basics I would also like to see in addition to an EXE
capability are:

1. The ability to make windows type file menus. ActiveX get close but not
the same. (My ActiveX menu example that is floating around.)

2. Better toolbar access. ActiveX is ok but configurability is limited.

3. Better ability to add window dressing like panel section dividers that
look more like C++.

4. Better definitions for ActiveX automation. (This may be a bit much to
ask)

5. Interface to PCI cards is difficult for those of us that are C++
Challenged. I use computer boards cards because they come with VEE drivers.
But using existing cards has been asked of me on several occasions. Last
week was the most recent instance. I am not familiar enough with using dll's
to do it with standard drivers. This may be more of a training or
documentation issue.

There are others but they are presently escaping me.

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 1:15 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

> The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE

I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:

Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?

The answer was:

No.

The representatives present explained that they felt that emulation was not
such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
"compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the "pseudo-machine", which is
emulated by the VEE runtime.

The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it *does* run on
any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is installed on
the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
(theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime is installed.
Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of architectures too, and
as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will (theoretically)
run on those machines as well.

This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted language. No matter
how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In my mind (no
jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.

Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler, but I have to
admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting to be less and
less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant future, the
point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure themselves to suit
our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.

Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86 executable will always
be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant questions are
"what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of programming facilities
do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything, and don't forget
it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have always been
attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see results. You
can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.

When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a demonstration of
functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much! The hell with UI
perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO. Once that's
signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the customer does make
some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd rather dive in
right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
rather than say "same time, same place, next week."

I regularly use a few different languages for different purposes, but so far
VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to test-bed ideas,
and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure don't deliver
applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually sit down and
brainstorm with it.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
mark.goldberg Oct 30, 2003 3:46 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Shawn,

I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still lacks
some simple requirements. I have lost jobs because of the interpreter
loading requirements. One such case was going to replace a DOS program
control for low cost model type CNC machines. They did not like the fact
that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded. Another was one where a company
used all of its old machines to run auto test and in some cases interpreting
was to slow. Some of these things missing have already been posted, but here
are some of the basics I would also like to see in addition to an EXE
capability are:

1. The ability to make windows type file menus. ActiveX get close but not
the same. (My ActiveX menu example that is floating around.)

2. Better toolbar access. ActiveX is ok but configurability is limited.

3. Better ability to add window dressing like panel section dividers that
look more like C++.

4. Better definitions for ActiveX automation. (This may be a bit much to
ask)

5. Interface to PCI cards is difficult for those of us that are C++
Challenged. I use computer boards cards because they come with VEE drivers.
But using existing cards has been asked of me on several occasions. Last
week was the most recent instance. I am not familiar enough with using dll's
to do it with standard drivers. This may be more of a training or
documentation issue.

There are others but they are presently escaping me.

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 1:15 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

> The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE

I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:

Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?

The answer was:

No.

The representatives present explained that they felt that emulation was not
such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
"compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the "pseudo-machine", which is
emulated by the VEE runtime.

The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it *does* run on
any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is installed on
the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
(theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime is installed.
Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of architectures too, and
as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will (theoretically)
run on those machines as well.

This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted language. No matter
how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In my mind (no
jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.

Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler, but I have to
admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting to be less and
less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant future, the
point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure themselves to suit
our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.

Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86 executable will always
be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant questions are
"what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of programming facilities
do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything, and don't forget
it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have always been
attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see results. You
can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.

When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a demonstration of
functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much! The hell with UI
perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO. Once that's
signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the customer does make
some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd rather dive in
right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
rather than say "same time, same place, next week."

I regularly use a few different languages for different purposes, but so far
VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to test-bed ideas,
and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure don't deliver
applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually sit down and
brainstorm with it.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
gurday Oct 30, 2003 5:02 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
I feel the look and feel is a relevant issue, and could be solved should
Agilent wanted to...it is just a matter of changing a short term priority
with a long term strategy that would make sense, and make it a more
competitive product to labview....unfortunately Agilent's great products
have always lacked a consistent marketing strategy that would make them just
that GREAT not only to few people but to the masses...

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 4:15 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

> The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE

I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:

Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?

The answer was:

No.

The representatives present explained that they felt that emulation was not
such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
"compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the "pseudo-machine", which is
emulated by the VEE runtime.

The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it *does* run on
any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is installed on
the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
(theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime is installed.
Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of architectures too, and
as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will (theoretically)
run on those machines as well.

This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted language. No matter
how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In my mind (no
jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.

Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler, but I have to
admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting to be less and
less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant future, the
point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure themselves to suit
our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.

Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86 executable will always
be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant questions are
"what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of programming facilities
do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything, and don't forget
it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have always been
attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see results. You
can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.

When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a demonstration of
functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much! The hell with UI
perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO. Once that's
signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the customer does make
some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd rather dive in
right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
rather than say "same time, same place, next week."

I regularly use a few different languages for different purposes, but so far
VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to test-bed ideas,
and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure don't deliver
applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually sit down and
brainstorm with it.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: gurday@negenex.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
gurday Oct 30, 2003 5:02 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
I feel the look and feel is a relevant issue, and could be solved should
Agilent wanted to...it is just a matter of changing a short term priority
with a long term strategy that would make sense, and make it a more
competitive product to labview....unfortunately Agilent's great products
have always lacked a consistent marketing strategy that would make them just
that GREAT not only to few people but to the masses...

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 4:15 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

> The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE

I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:

Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?

The answer was:

No.

The representatives present explained that they felt that emulation was not
such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
"compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the "pseudo-machine", which is
emulated by the VEE runtime.

The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it *does* run on
any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is installed on
the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
(theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime is installed.
Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of architectures too, and
as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will (theoretically)
run on those machines as well.

This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted language. No matter
how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In my mind (no
jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.

Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler, but I have to
admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting to be less and
less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant future, the
point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure themselves to suit
our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.

Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86 executable will always
be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant questions are
"what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of programming facilities
do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything, and don't forget
it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have always been
attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see results. You
can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.

When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a demonstration of
functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much! The hell with UI
perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO. Once that's
signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the customer does make
some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd rather dive in
right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
rather than say "same time, same place, next week."

I regularly use a few different languages for different purposes, but so far
VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to test-bed ideas,
and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure don't deliver
applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually sit down and
brainstorm with it.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: gurday@negenex.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
mark.goldberg Oct 30, 2003 5:15 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Jeff,

Item 2 on your wish list, are you talking about float over tool tips? The
menu I set up has them? Or were you referring to something else?

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Davis, Jeff [mailto:jeff.davis@cdi-es.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 8:08 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.

Unfortunately, most of our System Spec's have comments like "Standard
Windows File menus shall be utilized", "Standard Windows Help features shall
be utilized" etc. So the PO never gets submitted unless we bid the
development platform to be Visual C++.

1. I can use Robohelp to build the HTML help utilities for a VEE App.
2. I can use InstallShield to build professional Installation scripts for a
VEE App.
3. I can use 3rd party libraries for added UI features (FlexGrids, etc.)
4. VEE rocks with ActiveX, I can use it just fine as is or get help from VRF
members (Nied, Fessenden, Goldberg, Bischoff, Hamilton)
5. Execution speed of compiled .VXE's is not an issue with any of our App's.
6. The .VXE extension is not that big of an issue.

My wishlist would be:

1. Object Oriented Windows style Menu's (with submenus, check & uncheck
properties and the like)
2. Tool Tips
3. Built in FlexGrid object
4. Silent installation of the Runtime Environment

If Items 1 and 4 above were ever implemented, I could make a case for using
VEE to develop deliverable software, otherwise I keep geting shotdown no
matter what I demo to management.

Jeff Davis
Lead Software Test Engineer
CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
Embedded Systems and Electronics
3137 E Elwood # 160
Phoenix, Arizona 85034
Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
Cell: (480)330-1431
Fax: (602)431-4435

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 02:15 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
>
> I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
>
> Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
>
> The answer was:
>
> No.
>
> The representatives present explained that they felt that
> emulation was not
> such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> "pseudo-machine", which is
> emulated by the VEE runtime.
>
> The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> *does* run on
> any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> installed on
> the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> is installed.
> Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> architectures too, and
> as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> (theoretically)
> run on those machines as well.
>
> This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> language. No matter
> how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> my mind (no
> jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
>
> Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> but I have to
> admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> to be less and
> less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> future, the
> point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> themselves to suit
> our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.
>
> Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> executable will always
> be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> questions are
> "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> programming facilities
> do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> and don't forget
> it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
> because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> always been
> attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> results. You
> can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
>
> When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> demonstration of
> functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> Once that's
> signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> customer does make
> some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> rather dive in
> right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
> rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
>
> I regularly use a few different languages for different
> purposes, but so far
> VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> test-bed ideas,
> and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> don't deliver
> applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> sit down and
> brainstorm with it.
> -SHAWN-
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
mark.goldberg Oct 30, 2003 5:15 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Jeff,

Item 2 on your wish list, are you talking about float over tool tips? The
menu I set up has them? Or were you referring to something else?

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Davis, Jeff [mailto:jeff.davis@cdi-es.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 8:08 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.

Unfortunately, most of our System Spec's have comments like "Standard
Windows File menus shall be utilized", "Standard Windows Help features shall
be utilized" etc. So the PO never gets submitted unless we bid the
development platform to be Visual C++.

1. I can use Robohelp to build the HTML help utilities for a VEE App.
2. I can use InstallShield to build professional Installation scripts for a
VEE App.
3. I can use 3rd party libraries for added UI features (FlexGrids, etc.)
4. VEE rocks with ActiveX, I can use it just fine as is or get help from VRF
members (Nied, Fessenden, Goldberg, Bischoff, Hamilton)
5. Execution speed of compiled .VXE's is not an issue with any of our App's.
6. The .VXE extension is not that big of an issue.

My wishlist would be:

1. Object Oriented Windows style Menu's (with submenus, check & uncheck
properties and the like)
2. Tool Tips
3. Built in FlexGrid object
4. Silent installation of the Runtime Environment

If Items 1 and 4 above were ever implemented, I could make a case for using
VEE to develop deliverable software, otherwise I keep geting shotdown no
matter what I demo to management.

Jeff Davis
Lead Software Test Engineer
CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
Embedded Systems and Electronics
3137 E Elwood # 160
Phoenix, Arizona 85034
Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
Cell: (480)330-1431
Fax: (602)431-4435

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 02:15 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
>
> I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
>
> Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
>
> The answer was:
>
> No.
>
> The representatives present explained that they felt that
> emulation was not
> such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> "pseudo-machine", which is
> emulated by the VEE runtime.
>
> The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> *does* run on
> any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> installed on
> the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> is installed.
> Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> architectures too, and
> as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> (theoretically)
> run on those machines as well.
>
> This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> language. No matter
> how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> my mind (no
> jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
>
> Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> but I have to
> admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> to be less and
> less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> future, the
> point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> themselves to suit
> our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.
>
> Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> executable will always
> be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> questions are
> "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> programming facilities
> do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> and don't forget
> it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
> because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> always been
> attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> results. You
> can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
>
> When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> demonstration of
> functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> Once that's
> signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> customer does make
> some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> rather dive in
> right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
> rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
>
> I regularly use a few different languages for different
> purposes, but so far
> VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> test-bed ideas,
> and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> don't deliver
> applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> sit down and
> brainstorm with it.
> -SHAWN-
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
mark.goldberg Oct 30, 2003 5:36 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Sorry only on the buttons not item menus.

-----Original Message-----
From: Davis, Jeff [mailto:jeff.davis@cdi-es.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 8:22 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

"float overs" on comand buttons, and menu items is what I am yakking about

Jeff Davis
Lead Software Test Engineer
CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
Embedded Systems and Electronics
3137 E Elwood # 160
Phoenix, Arizona 85034
Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
Cell: (480)330-1431
Fax: (602)431-4435

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Goldberg, Mark [mailto:Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 09:16 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> Jeff,
>
> Item 2 on your wish list, are you talking about float over
> tool tips? The
> menu I set up has them? Or were you referring to something else?
>
> Mark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Davis, Jeff [mailto:jeff.davis@cdi-es.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 8:08 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
>
> > The hell with UI
> > perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
>
> Unfortunately, most of our System Spec's have comments like "Standard
> Windows File menus shall be utilized", "Standard Windows Help
> features shall
> be utilized" etc. So the PO never gets submitted unless we bid the
> development platform to be Visual C++.
>
> 1. I can use Robohelp to build the HTML help utilities for a VEE App.
> 2. I can use InstallShield to build professional Installation
> scripts for a
> VEE App.
> 3. I can use 3rd party libraries for added UI features
> (FlexGrids, etc.)
> 4. VEE rocks with ActiveX, I can use it just fine as is or
> get help from VRF
> members (Nied, Fessenden, Goldberg, Bischoff, Hamilton)
> 5. Execution speed of compiled .VXE's is not an issue with
> any of our App's.
> 6. The .VXE extension is not that big of an issue.
>
> My wishlist would be:
>
> 1. Object Oriented Windows style Menu's (with submenus, check
> & uncheck
> properties and the like)
> 2. Tool Tips
> 3. Built in FlexGrid object
> 4. Silent installation of the Runtime Environment
>
> If Items 1 and 4 above were ever implemented, I could make a
> case for using
> VEE to develop deliverable software, otherwise I keep geting
> shotdown no
> matter what I demo to management.
>
> Jeff Davis
> Lead Software Test Engineer
> CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
> Embedded Systems and Electronics
> 3137 E Elwood # 160
> Phoenix, Arizona 85034
> Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
> Cell: (480)330-1431
> Fax: (602)431-4435
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 02:15 AM
> > To: VEE vrf
> > Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
> >
> >
> > > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
> >
> > I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
> >
> > Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
> >
> > The answer was:
> >
> > No.
> >
> > The representatives present explained that they felt that
> > emulation was not
> > such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> > background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> > "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> > pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> > responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> > "pseudo-machine", which is
> > emulated by the VEE runtime.
> >
> > The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> > *does* run on
> > any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> > installed on
> > the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> > (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> > is installed.
> > Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> > architectures too, and
> > as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> > (theoretically)
> > run on those machines as well.
> >
> > This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> > language. No matter
> > how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> > my mind (no
> > jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
> >
> > Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> > but I have to
> > admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> > to be less and
> > less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> > future, the
> > point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> > themselves to suit
> > our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular
> architecture.
> >
> > Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> > executable will always
> > be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> > questions are
> > "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> > programming facilities
> > do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> > and don't forget
> > it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to
> non-programmers
> > because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> > power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> > always been
> > attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> > results. You
> > can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
> >
> > When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> > demonstration of
> > functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> > The hell with UI
> > perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> > Once that's
> > signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> > customer does make
> > some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> > rather dive in
> > right then and rearrange some things right in front of his
> or her eyes
> > rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
> >
> > I regularly use a few different languages for different
> > purposes, but so far
> > VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> > test-bed ideas,
> > and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> > don't deliver
> > applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> > sit down and
> > brainstorm with it.
> > -SHAWN-
> >
> >
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> > To subscribe send a blank email to
> "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > To send messages to this mailing list, email
> > "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> > "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > __________
> > This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> > Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> > service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> > http://www.messagelabs.com
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > __________
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
mark.goldberg Oct 30, 2003 5:36 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Sorry only on the buttons not item menus.

-----Original Message-----
From: Davis, Jeff [mailto:jeff.davis@cdi-es.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 8:22 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

"float overs" on comand buttons, and menu items is what I am yakking about

Jeff Davis
Lead Software Test Engineer
CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
Embedded Systems and Electronics
3137 E Elwood # 160
Phoenix, Arizona 85034
Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
Cell: (480)330-1431
Fax: (602)431-4435

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Goldberg, Mark [mailto:Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 09:16 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> Jeff,
>
> Item 2 on your wish list, are you talking about float over
> tool tips? The
> menu I set up has them? Or were you referring to something else?
>
> Mark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Davis, Jeff [mailto:jeff.davis@cdi-es.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 8:08 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
>
> > The hell with UI
> > perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
>
> Unfortunately, most of our System Spec's have comments like "Standard
> Windows File menus shall be utilized", "Standard Windows Help
> features shall
> be utilized" etc. So the PO never gets submitted unless we bid the
> development platform to be Visual C++.
>
> 1. I can use Robohelp to build the HTML help utilities for a VEE App.
> 2. I can use InstallShield to build professional Installation
> scripts for a
> VEE App.
> 3. I can use 3rd party libraries for added UI features
> (FlexGrids, etc.)
> 4. VEE rocks with ActiveX, I can use it just fine as is or
> get help from VRF
> members (Nied, Fessenden, Goldberg, Bischoff, Hamilton)
> 5. Execution speed of compiled .VXE's is not an issue with
> any of our App's.
> 6. The .VXE extension is not that big of an issue.
>
> My wishlist would be:
>
> 1. Object Oriented Windows style Menu's (with submenus, check
> & uncheck
> properties and the like)
> 2. Tool Tips
> 3. Built in FlexGrid object
> 4. Silent installation of the Runtime Environment
>
> If Items 1 and 4 above were ever implemented, I could make a
> case for using
> VEE to develop deliverable software, otherwise I keep geting
> shotdown no
> matter what I demo to management.
>
> Jeff Davis
> Lead Software Test Engineer
> CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
> Embedded Systems and Electronics
> 3137 E Elwood # 160
> Phoenix, Arizona 85034
> Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
> Cell: (480)330-1431
> Fax: (602)431-4435
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 02:15 AM
> > To: VEE vrf
> > Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
> >
> >
> > > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
> >
> > I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
> >
> > Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
> >
> > The answer was:
> >
> > No.
> >
> > The representatives present explained that they felt that
> > emulation was not
> > such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> > background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> > "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> > pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> > responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> > "pseudo-machine", which is
> > emulated by the VEE runtime.
> >
> > The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> > *does* run on
> > any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> > installed on
> > the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> > (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> > is installed.
> > Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> > architectures too, and
> > as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> > (theoretically)
> > run on those machines as well.
> >
> > This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> > language. No matter
> > how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> > my mind (no
> > jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
> >
> > Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> > but I have to
> > admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> > to be less and
> > less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> > future, the
> > point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> > themselves to suit
> > our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular
> architecture.
> >
> > Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> > executable will always
> > be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> > questions are
> > "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> > programming facilities
> > do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> > and don't forget
> > it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to
> non-programmers
> > because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> > power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> > always been
> > attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> > results. You
> > can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
> >
> > When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> > demonstration of
> > functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> > The hell with UI
> > perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> > Once that's
> > signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> > customer does make
> > some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> > rather dive in
> > right then and rearrange some things right in front of his
> or her eyes
> > rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
> >
> > I regularly use a few different languages for different
> > purposes, but so far
> > VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> > test-bed ideas,
> > and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> > don't deliver
> > applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> > sit down and
> > brainstorm with it.
> > -SHAWN-
> >
> >
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> > To subscribe send a blank email to
> "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > To send messages to this mailing list, email
> > "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> > "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > __________
> > This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> > Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> > service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> > http://www.messagelabs.com
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > __________
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 6:05 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
I agree with most of what Shawn says.

However, I have been saying for a long time that Agilent is missing a
marketing opportunity with Vee. Sure it originated as a quick and dirty
tool for non-programming test engineers to achieve test programs but in its
later incarnations Vee is so much more than this.

I view Vee very much like the kind of "powerpoint" of the programming world.
I routinely embed links to activeX controls, activeX servers, compiled DLLs,
etc within my vee programs to develop extremely powerful programs extremely
quickly.

In this context, Vee should have applications far wider than test and
measurement because at one level it is so powerful and so productive.

The "interpreted" thing is no big deal for me really.   My Vee programs run
fast enough.   The big "customer" issues are the "look and feel" of the
applications you can develop, the distribution of the runtimes and the
tendency of Vee to use a lot of system resources. The Vee runtime
interpreter likes to take total control of windows with the result that any
other running program looks as if it is wading through treacle. (I fully
accept that this is a good thing for certain vee applications!)

There are other detailed technical issues of course that have been discussed
numerous times on this forum.

I think Agilent could address many of the issues quite easily and in doing
so open up the market for Vee if they so wished.

Would it be so difficult to give us standard windows type UI objects and
allow these to drive events? (by the way have you ever tried to debug Vee
code that is "event driven" from an activeX control???)

Would it be so difficult to allow us to build "installers" for finished
applications that invisibly installed the vee runtime? (I am still running
Vee 6.03 so for my customers they need to install Vee 6.0 runtime followed
by Vee 6.01 upgrade followed by Vee 6.03 upgrade!!!).

Would it be so difficult to allow us to make some modification to the
settings on the vee runtime interpreter such that we could decide how it was
going to interact with Windows in terms of stealing resources?

I love using vee.   It always impresses people that I can turn out pretty
polished applications in the space of a day or two.

I just think Agilent is missing a trick or two and could do some really good
business with Vee if they were really committed to developing the platform.

(With reference to my earlier post of course, I have no idea what is planned
for Vee 7.0 so I have a hat ready and waiting to be eaten if Vee 7.0
demonstrates Agilent is committed to Vee).

Take it easy.

Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
Sent: 31 October 2003 09:15
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

> The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE

I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:

Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?

The answer was:

No.

The representatives present explained that they felt that emulation was not
such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
"compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the "pseudo-machine", which is
emulated by the VEE runtime.

The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it *does* run on
any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is installed on
the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
(theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime is installed.
Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of architectures too, and
as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will (theoretically)
run on those machines as well.

This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted language. No matter
how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In my mind (no
jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.

Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler, but I have to
admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting to be less and
less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant future, the
point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure themselves to suit
our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.

Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86 executable will always
be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant questions are
"what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of programming facilities
do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything, and don't forget
it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have always been
attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see results. You
can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.

When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a demonstration of
functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much! The hell with UI
perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO. Once that's
signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the customer does make
some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd rather dive in
right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
rather than say "same time, same place, next week."

I regularly use a few different languages for different purposes, but so far
VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to test-bed ideas,
and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure don't deliver
applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually sit down and
brainstorm with it.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Nick@genesysibs.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 27/10/2003

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 6:05 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
I agree with most of what Shawn says.

However, I have been saying for a long time that Agilent is missing a
marketing opportunity with Vee. Sure it originated as a quick and dirty
tool for non-programming test engineers to achieve test programs but in its
later incarnations Vee is so much more than this.

I view Vee very much like the kind of "powerpoint" of the programming world.
I routinely embed links to activeX controls, activeX servers, compiled DLLs,
etc within my vee programs to develop extremely powerful programs extremely
quickly.

In this context, Vee should have applications far wider than test and
measurement because at one level it is so powerful and so productive.

The "interpreted" thing is no big deal for me really.   My Vee programs run
fast enough.   The big "customer" issues are the "look and feel" of the
applications you can develop, the distribution of the runtimes and the
tendency of Vee to use a lot of system resources. The Vee runtime
interpreter likes to take total control of windows with the result that any
other running program looks as if it is wading through treacle. (I fully
accept that this is a good thing for certain vee applications!)

There are other detailed technical issues of course that have been discussed
numerous times on this forum.

I think Agilent could address many of the issues quite easily and in doing
so open up the market for Vee if they so wished.

Would it be so difficult to give us standard windows type UI objects and
allow these to drive events? (by the way have you ever tried to debug Vee
code that is "event driven" from an activeX control???)

Would it be so difficult to allow us to build "installers" for finished
applications that invisibly installed the vee runtime? (I am still running
Vee 6.03 so for my customers they need to install Vee 6.0 runtime followed
by Vee 6.01 upgrade followed by Vee 6.03 upgrade!!!).

Would it be so difficult to allow us to make some modification to the
settings on the vee runtime interpreter such that we could decide how it was
going to interact with Windows in terms of stealing resources?

I love using vee.   It always impresses people that I can turn out pretty
polished applications in the space of a day or two.

I just think Agilent is missing a trick or two and could do some really good
business with Vee if they were really committed to developing the platform.

(With reference to my earlier post of course, I have no idea what is planned
for Vee 7.0 so I have a hat ready and waiting to be eaten if Vee 7.0
demonstrates Agilent is committed to Vee).

Take it easy.

Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
Sent: 31 October 2003 09:15
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

> The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE

I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:

Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?

The answer was:

No.

The representatives present explained that they felt that emulation was not
such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
"compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the "pseudo-machine", which is
emulated by the VEE runtime.

The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it *does* run on
any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is installed on
the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
(theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime is installed.
Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of architectures too, and
as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will (theoretically)
run on those machines as well.

This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted language. No matter
how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In my mind (no
jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.

Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler, but I have to
admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting to be less and
less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant future, the
point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure themselves to suit
our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.

Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86 executable will always
be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant questions are
"what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of programming facilities
do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything, and don't forget
it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have always been
attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see results. You
can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.

When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a demonstration of
functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much! The hell with UI
perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO. Once that's
signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the customer does make
some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd rather dive in
right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
rather than say "same time, same place, next week."

I regularly use a few different languages for different purposes, but so far
VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to test-bed ideas,
and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure don't deliver
applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually sit down and
brainstorm with it.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Nick@genesysibs.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 27/10/2003

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 7:08 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer

> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.

Unfortunately, most of our System Spec's have comments like "Standard
Windows File menus shall be utilized", "Standard Windows Help features shall
be utilized" etc. So the PO never gets submitted unless we bid the
development platform to be Visual C++.

1. I can use Robohelp to build the HTML help utilities for a VEE App.
2. I can use InstallShield to build professional Installation scripts for a
VEE App.
3. I can use 3rd party libraries for added UI features (FlexGrids, etc.)
4. VEE rocks with ActiveX, I can use it just fine as is or get help from VRF
members (Nied, Fessenden, Goldberg, Bischoff, Hamilton)
5. Execution speed of compiled .VXE's is not an issue with any of our App's.
6. The .VXE extension is not that big of an issue.

My wishlist would be:

1. Object Oriented Windows style Menu's (with submenus, check & uncheck
properties and the like)
2. Tool Tips
3. Built in FlexGrid object
4. Silent installation of the Runtime Environment

If Items 1 and 4 above were ever implemented, I could make a case for using
VEE to develop deliverable software, otherwise I keep geting shotdown no
matter what I demo to management.

Jeff Davis
Lead Software Test Engineer
CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
Embedded Systems and Electronics
3137 E Elwood # 160
Phoenix, Arizona 85034
Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
Cell: (480)330-1431
Fax: (602)431-4435

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 02:15 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
>
> I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
>
> Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
>
> The answer was:
>
> No.
>
> The representatives present explained that they felt that
> emulation was not
> such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> "pseudo-machine", which is
> emulated by the VEE runtime.
>
> The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> *does* run on
> any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> installed on
> the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> is installed.
> Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> architectures too, and
> as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> (theoretically)
> run on those machines as well.
>
> This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> language. No matter
> how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> my mind (no
> jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
>
> Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> but I have to
> admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> to be less and
> less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> future, the
> point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> themselves to suit
> our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.
>
> Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> executable will always
> be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> questions are
> "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> programming facilities
> do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> and don't forget
> it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
> because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> always been
> attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> results. You
> can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
>
> When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> demonstration of
> functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> Once that's
> signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> customer does make
> some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> rather dive in
> right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
> rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
>
> I regularly use a few different languages for different
> purposes, but so far
> VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> test-bed ideas,
> and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> don't deliver
> applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> sit down and
> brainstorm with it.
> -SHAWN-
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 7:08 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer

> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.

Unfortunately, most of our System Spec's have comments like "Standard
Windows File menus shall be utilized", "Standard Windows Help features shall
be utilized" etc. So the PO never gets submitted unless we bid the
development platform to be Visual C++.

1. I can use Robohelp to build the HTML help utilities for a VEE App.
2. I can use InstallShield to build professional Installation scripts for a
VEE App.
3. I can use 3rd party libraries for added UI features (FlexGrids, etc.)
4. VEE rocks with ActiveX, I can use it just fine as is or get help from VRF
members (Nied, Fessenden, Goldberg, Bischoff, Hamilton)
5. Execution speed of compiled .VXE's is not an issue with any of our App's.
6. The .VXE extension is not that big of an issue.

My wishlist would be:

1. Object Oriented Windows style Menu's (with submenus, check & uncheck
properties and the like)
2. Tool Tips
3. Built in FlexGrid object
4. Silent installation of the Runtime Environment

If Items 1 and 4 above were ever implemented, I could make a case for using
VEE to develop deliverable software, otherwise I keep geting shotdown no
matter what I demo to management.

Jeff Davis
Lead Software Test Engineer
CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
Embedded Systems and Electronics
3137 E Elwood # 160
Phoenix, Arizona 85034
Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
Cell: (480)330-1431
Fax: (602)431-4435

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 02:15 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
>
> I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
>
> Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
>
> The answer was:
>
> No.
>
> The representatives present explained that they felt that
> emulation was not
> such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> "pseudo-machine", which is
> emulated by the VEE runtime.
>
> The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> *does* run on
> any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> installed on
> the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> is installed.
> Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> architectures too, and
> as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> (theoretically)
> run on those machines as well.
>
> This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> language. No matter
> how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> my mind (no
> jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
>
> Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> but I have to
> admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> to be less and
> less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> future, the
> point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> themselves to suit
> our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.
>
> Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> executable will always
> be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> questions are
> "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> programming facilities
> do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> and don't forget
> it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
> because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> always been
> attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> results. You
> can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
>
> When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> demonstration of
> functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> Once that's
> signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> customer does make
> some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> rather dive in
> right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
> rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
>
> I regularly use a few different languages for different
> purposes, but so far
> VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> test-bed ideas,
> and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> don't deliver
> applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> sit down and
> brainstorm with it.
> -SHAWN-
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 7:22 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
"float overs" on comand buttons, and menu items is what I am yakking about

Jeff Davis
Lead Software Test Engineer
CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
Embedded Systems and Electronics
3137 E Elwood # 160
Phoenix, Arizona 85034
Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
Cell: (480)330-1431
Fax: (602)431-4435

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Goldberg, Mark [mailto:Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 09:16 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> Jeff,
>
> Item 2 on your wish list, are you talking about float over
> tool tips? The
> menu I set up has them? Or were you referring to something else?
>
> Mark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Davis, Jeff [mailto:jeff.davis@cdi-es.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 8:08 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
>
> > The hell with UI
> > perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
>
> Unfortunately, most of our System Spec's have comments like "Standard
> Windows File menus shall be utilized", "Standard Windows Help
> features shall
> be utilized" etc. So the PO never gets submitted unless we bid the
> development platform to be Visual C++.
>
> 1. I can use Robohelp to build the HTML help utilities for a VEE App.
> 2. I can use InstallShield to build professional Installation
> scripts for a
> VEE App.
> 3. I can use 3rd party libraries for added UI features
> (FlexGrids, etc.)
> 4. VEE rocks with ActiveX, I can use it just fine as is or
> get help from VRF
> members (Nied, Fessenden, Goldberg, Bischoff, Hamilton)
> 5. Execution speed of compiled .VXE's is not an issue with
> any of our App's.
> 6. The .VXE extension is not that big of an issue.
>
> My wishlist would be:
>
> 1. Object Oriented Windows style Menu's (with submenus, check
> & uncheck
> properties and the like)
> 2. Tool Tips
> 3. Built in FlexGrid object
> 4. Silent installation of the Runtime Environment
>
> If Items 1 and 4 above were ever implemented, I could make a
> case for using
> VEE to develop deliverable software, otherwise I keep geting
> shotdown no
> matter what I demo to management.
>
> Jeff Davis
> Lead Software Test Engineer
> CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
> Embedded Systems and Electronics
> 3137 E Elwood # 160
> Phoenix, Arizona 85034
> Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
> Cell: (480)330-1431
> Fax: (602)431-4435
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 02:15 AM
> > To: VEE vrf
> > Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
> >
> >
> > > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
> >
> > I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
> >
> > Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
> >
> > The answer was:
> >
> > No.
> >
> > The representatives present explained that they felt that
> > emulation was not
> > such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> > background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> > "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> > pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> > responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> > "pseudo-machine", which is
> > emulated by the VEE runtime.
> >
> > The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> > *does* run on
> > any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> > installed on
> > the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> > (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> > is installed.
> > Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> > architectures too, and
> > as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> > (theoretically)
> > run on those machines as well.
> >
> > This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> > language. No matter
> > how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> > my mind (no
> > jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
> >
> > Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> > but I have to
> > admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> > to be less and
> > less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> > future, the
> > point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> > themselves to suit
> > our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular
> architecture.
> >
> > Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> > executable will always
> > be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> > questions are
> > "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> > programming facilities
> > do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> > and don't forget
> > it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to
> non-programmers
> > because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> > power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> > always been
> > attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> > results. You
> > can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
> >
> > When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> > demonstration of
> > functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> > The hell with UI
> > perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> > Once that's
> > signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> > customer does make
> > some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> > rather dive in
> > right then and rearrange some things right in front of his
> or her eyes
> > rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
> >
> > I regularly use a few different languages for different
> > purposes, but so far
> > VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> > test-bed ideas,
> > and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> > don't deliver
> > applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> > sit down and
> > brainstorm with it.
> > -SHAWN-
> >
> >
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> > To subscribe send a blank email to
> "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > To send messages to this mailing list, email
> > "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> > "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > __________
> > This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> > Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> > service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> > http://www.messagelabs.com
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > __________
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 7:22 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
"float overs" on comand buttons, and menu items is what I am yakking about

Jeff Davis
Lead Software Test Engineer
CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
Embedded Systems and Electronics
3137 E Elwood # 160
Phoenix, Arizona 85034
Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
Cell: (480)330-1431
Fax: (602)431-4435

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Goldberg, Mark [mailto:Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 09:16 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> Jeff,
>
> Item 2 on your wish list, are you talking about float over
> tool tips? The
> menu I set up has them? Or were you referring to something else?
>
> Mark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Davis, Jeff [mailto:jeff.davis@cdi-es.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 8:08 AM
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
>
> > The hell with UI
> > perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
>
> Unfortunately, most of our System Spec's have comments like "Standard
> Windows File menus shall be utilized", "Standard Windows Help
> features shall
> be utilized" etc. So the PO never gets submitted unless we bid the
> development platform to be Visual C++.
>
> 1. I can use Robohelp to build the HTML help utilities for a VEE App.
> 2. I can use InstallShield to build professional Installation
> scripts for a
> VEE App.
> 3. I can use 3rd party libraries for added UI features
> (FlexGrids, etc.)
> 4. VEE rocks with ActiveX, I can use it just fine as is or
> get help from VRF
> members (Nied, Fessenden, Goldberg, Bischoff, Hamilton)
> 5. Execution speed of compiled .VXE's is not an issue with
> any of our App's.
> 6. The .VXE extension is not that big of an issue.
>
> My wishlist would be:
>
> 1. Object Oriented Windows style Menu's (with submenus, check
> & uncheck
> properties and the like)
> 2. Tool Tips
> 3. Built in FlexGrid object
> 4. Silent installation of the Runtime Environment
>
> If Items 1 and 4 above were ever implemented, I could make a
> case for using
> VEE to develop deliverable software, otherwise I keep geting
> shotdown no
> matter what I demo to management.
>
> Jeff Davis
> Lead Software Test Engineer
> CDI Engineering Solutions Aerospace Technologies
> Embedded Systems and Electronics
> 3137 E Elwood # 160
> Phoenix, Arizona 85034
> Phone: (602)431-4497 (x226)
> Cell: (480)330-1431
> Fax: (602)431-4435
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> > Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 02:15 AM
> > To: VEE vrf
> > Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
> >
> >
> > > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
> >
> > I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
> >
> > Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
> >
> > The answer was:
> >
> > No.
> >
> > The representatives present explained that they felt that
> > emulation was not
> > such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> > background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> > "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> > pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> > responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> > "pseudo-machine", which is
> > emulated by the VEE runtime.
> >
> > The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> > *does* run on
> > any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> > installed on
> > the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> > (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> > is installed.
> > Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> > architectures too, and
> > as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> > (theoretically)
> > run on those machines as well.
> >
> > This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> > language. No matter
> > how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> > my mind (no
> > jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
> >
> > Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> > but I have to
> > admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> > to be less and
> > less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> > future, the
> > point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> > themselves to suit
> > our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular
> architecture.
> >
> > Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> > executable will always
> > be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> > questions are
> > "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> > programming facilities
> > do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> > and don't forget
> > it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to
> non-programmers
> > because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> > power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> > always been
> > attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> > results. You
> > can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
> >
> > When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> > demonstration of
> > functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> > The hell with UI
> > perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> > Once that's
> > signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> > customer does make
> > some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> > rather dive in
> > right then and rearrange some things right in front of his
> or her eyes
> > rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
> >
> > I regularly use a few different languages for different
> > purposes, but so far
> > VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> > test-bed ideas,
> > and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> > don't deliver
> > applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> > sit down and
> > brainstorm with it.
> > -SHAWN-
> >
> >
> > ---
> > You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> > To subscribe send a blank email to
> "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> > "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > To send messages to this mailing list, email
> > "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> > If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> > "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > __________
> > This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> > Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> > service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> > http://www.messagelabs.com
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > __________
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jeff.davis@cdi-es.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
> This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
> Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
> service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
> http://www.messagelabs.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> __________
>

________________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs Email
Security System. For more information on a proactive email security
service working around the clock, around the globe, visit
http://www.messagelabs.com
________________________________________________________________________

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
tapio.ronkainen Oct 30, 2003 7:42 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Amen!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> Sent: 31 October, 2003 11:15
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
>
> I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
>
> Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
>
> The answer was:
>
> No.
>
> The representatives present explained that they felt that
> emulation was not
> such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> "pseudo-machine", which is
> emulated by the VEE runtime.
>
> The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> *does* run on
> any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> installed on
> the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> is installed.
> Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> architectures too, and
> as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> (theoretically)
> run on those machines as well.
>
> This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> language. No matter
> how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> my mind (no
> jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
>
> Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> but I have to
> admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> to be less and
> less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> future, the
> point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> themselves to suit
> our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.
>
> Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> executable will always
> be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> questions are
> "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> programming facilities
> do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> and don't forget
> it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
> because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> always been
> attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> results. You
> can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
>
> When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> demonstration of
> functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> Once that's
> signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> customer does make
> some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> rather dive in
> right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
> rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
>
> I regularly use a few different languages for different
> purposes, but so far
> VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> test-bed ideas,
> and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> don't deliver
> applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> sit down and
> brainstorm with it.
> -SHAWN-
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: tapio.ronkainen@nokia.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
tapio.ronkainen Oct 30, 2003 7:42 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Amen!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> Sent: 31 October, 2003 11:15
> To: VEE vrf
> Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
>
> I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
>
> Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
>
> The answer was:
>
> No.
>
> The representatives present explained that they felt that
> emulation was not
> such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> "pseudo-machine", which is
> emulated by the VEE runtime.
>
> The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> *does* run on
> any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> installed on
> the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> is installed.
> Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> architectures too, and
> as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> (theoretically)
> run on those machines as well.
>
> This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> language. No matter
> how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> my mind (no
> jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
>
> Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> but I have to
> admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> to be less and
> less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> future, the
> point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> themselves to suit
> our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.
>
> Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> executable will always
> be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> questions are
> "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> programming facilities
> do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> and don't forget
> it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
> because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> always been
> attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> results. You
> can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
>
> When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> demonstration of
> functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> Once that's
> signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> customer does make
> some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> rather dive in
> right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
> rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
>
> I regularly use a few different languages for different
> purposes, but so far
> VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> test-bed ideas,
> and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> don't deliver
> applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> sit down and
> brainstorm with it.
> -SHAWN-
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: tapio.ronkainen@nokia.com
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 8:14 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2657.73"><TITLE>RE: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7</TITLE></HEAD><BODY>I'm a longtime user of VEE..(Work force management victim of from Agilent).. New user of LabView (ver7)....my opinon..the only thing Vee rivals LabView in is speed of development..And for me the jury's still out on that..(this isn't sour grapes talking)..-----Original Message----- From: Shawn Fessenden [<A HREF="mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com">mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com</A>] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:51 AM To: VEE vrf Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 > I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still > lacks some simple requirements.I understand. I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support & whatnot. You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few words that will maybe help clarify what Ken was saying:> They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded.When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces) writes programs anymore. We all write applications. A program is a self-contained unit that consists of all the code and data necessary to get any particular job done. An application is more or less an executive driver that uses the services of other units or components and an operating system that have been put together in a particular fashion to get a particular job done. At the operating system level, this collection of services is usually called an Application Programming Interface - API. On higher levels, they are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or software components of one kind or other - ActiveX, the more general COM, .Net - whatever.I think the point Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if the finished product is anything but a true program it's going to rely on the services of external entities. We who use compiled languages usually have the option of creating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS API calls because we can statically link with support object (here meaning a file that's an intermediate step between compile and link) libraries to include all the support code necessary to implement the abstractions we take for granted on the high-level language plateau. All the relevant code from the MFC dlls is linked in (or of course whatever abstractions are provided by your compiler vendor that are optionally statically linked with your finished application), all the code from the C RTL is linked in, and the only things left external are Win32 API calls to a few DLLs.Now, this simply isn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The resulting executables are truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of megabytes, but it's an option. VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give you that option. The support libraries must always exist on the target machine, and because no machine comes with VEE or LabView installed you must install at least their run time support components in order to use any VEE or LabView application.This is simply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's worth mentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's run time libraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the run time, but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components, include them in your vxe and simply have it silently install and register whatever is necessary if those components don't already exist on the target machine. Or break it up: have the installer in a separate VEE library and import it if necessary. Or, what's more feasible is to simply use a third-party installer product who's primary job is to install the VEE run time components. That way is probably more in line with Agilent's license requirements and you don't need to swell your vxe with what after it's first run becomes tens of megabytes of useless baggage.As far as look-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used to believe that the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that it was ported from HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of X emulation for drawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If that's not the case then I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you get a Windows focus rectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE. When you call TranslateAccelerator, you get hot keys and keyboard control of UI elements that contain underlines, not a list of function keys that can optionally be assigned to buttons.Windows defines a large number of standard window classes for objects such as menus, buttons, list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5anyway) does not use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own way and uses it's own window classes to do so. The end result is this non-standard look-and-feel, and I agree with those who say that more effort needs to go into cleaning up this non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the direction of standards, but it remains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the past will be rectified.-SHAWN- --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Chris.Gove@plantronics.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 8:14 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2657.73"><TITLE>RE: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7</TITLE></HEAD><BODY>I'm a longtime user of VEE..(Work force management victim of from Agilent).. New user of LabView (ver7)....my opinon..the only thing Vee rivals LabView in is speed of development..And for me the jury's still out on that..(this isn't sour grapes talking)..-----Original Message----- From: Shawn Fessenden [<A HREF="mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com">mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com</A>] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:51 AM To: VEE vrf Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 > I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still > lacks some simple requirements.I understand. I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support & whatnot. You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few words that will maybe help clarify what Ken was saying:> They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded.When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces) writes programs anymore. We all write applications. A program is a self-contained unit that consists of all the code and data necessary to get any particular job done. An application is more or less an executive driver that uses the services of other units or components and an operating system that have been put together in a particular fashion to get a particular job done. At the operating system level, this collection of services is usually called an Application Programming Interface - API. On higher levels, they are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or software components of one kind or other - ActiveX, the more general COM, .Net - whatever.I think the point Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if the finished product is anything but a true program it's going to rely on the services of external entities. We who use compiled languages usually have the option of creating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS API calls because we can statically link with support object (here meaning a file that's an intermediate step between compile and link) libraries to include all the support code necessary to implement the abstractions we take for granted on the high-level language plateau. All the relevant code from the MFC dlls is linked in (or of course whatever abstractions are provided by your compiler vendor that are optionally statically linked with your finished application), all the code from the C RTL is linked in, and the only things left external are Win32 API calls to a few DLLs.Now, this simply isn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The resulting executables are truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of megabytes, but it's an option. VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give you that option. The support libraries must always exist on the target machine, and because no machine comes with VEE or LabView installed you must install at least their run time support components in order to use any VEE or LabView application.This is simply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's worth mentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's run time libraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the run time, but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components, include them in your vxe and simply have it silently install and register whatever is necessary if those components don't already exist on the target machine. Or break it up: have the installer in a separate VEE library and import it if necessary. Or, what's more feasible is to simply use a third-party installer product who's primary job is to install the VEE run time components. That way is probably more in line with Agilent's license requirements and you don't need to swell your vxe with what after it's first run becomes tens of megabytes of useless baggage.As far as look-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used to believe that the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that it was ported from HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of X emulation for drawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If that's not the case then I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you get a Windows focus rectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE. When you call TranslateAccelerator, you get hot keys and keyboard control of UI elements that contain underlines, not a list of function keys that can optionally be assigned to buttons.Windows defines a large number of standard window classes for objects such as menus, buttons, list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5anyway) does not use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own way and uses it's own window classes to do so. The end result is this non-standard look-and-feel, and I agree with those who say that more effort needs to go into cleaning up this non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the direction of standards, but it remains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the past will be rectified.-SHAWN- --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Chris.Gove@plantronics.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
willie.kiely Oct 30, 2003 8:34 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"><TITLE>RE: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7</TITLE><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR></HEAD><BODY><DIV>One powerful thing Labview does NOT have is ....I think?...... the formula input control pin in the formula box. In vee you can write your engine, and have users just changing text files to adjust formulas....even referencing variables from the development code, that Vee just brings in as text strings into the formula box, without interfering with the development code of the engine.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Let me know if this is not the case in LabView.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Regards,</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV> </DIV><BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left>-----Original Message----- From: Gove, Chris [mailto:Chris.Gove@plantronics.com] Sent: 31 October 2003 20:15 To: VEE vrf Cc: 'vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com' Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 </DIV> I'm a longtime user of VEE..(Work force management victim of from Agilent).. New user of LabView (ver7)....my opinon..the only thing Vee rivals LabView in is speed of development..And for me the jury's still out on that..(this isn't sour grapes talking).. -----Original Message----- From: Shawn Fessenden [<A href="mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com">mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com</A>] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:51 AM To: VEE vrf Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 > I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still > lacks some simple requirements. I understand. I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support & whatnot. You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few words that will maybe help clarify what Ken was saying: > They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded. When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces) writes programs anymore. We all write applications. A program is a self-contained unit that consists of all the code and data necessary to get any particular job done. An application is more or less an executive driver that uses the services of other units or components and an operating system that have been put together in a particular fashion to get a particular job done. At the operating system level, this collection of services is usually called an Application Programming Interface - API. On higher levels, they are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or software components of one kind or other - ActiveX, the more general COM, .Net - whatever. I think the point Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if the finished product is anything but a true program it's going to rely on the services of external entities. We who use compiled languages usually have the option of creating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS API calls because we can statically link with support object (here meaning a file that's an intermediate step between compile and link) libraries to include all the support code necessary to implement the abstractions we take for granted on the high-level language plateau. All the relevant code from the MFC dlls is linked in (or of course whatever abstractions are provided by your compiler vendor that are optionally statically linked with your finished application), all the code from the C RTL is linked in, and the only things left external are Win32 API calls to a few DLLs. Now, this simply isn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The resulting executables are truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of megabytes, but it's an option. VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give you that option. The support libraries must always exist on the target machine, and because no machine comes with VEE or LabView installed you must install at least their run time support components in order to use any VEE or LabView application. This is simply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's worth mentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's run time libraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the run time, but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components, include them in your vxe and simply have it silently install and register whatever is necessary if those components don't already exist on the target machine. Or break it up: have the installer in a separate VEE library and import it if necessary. Or, what's more feasible is to simply use a third-party installer product who's primary job is to install the VEE run time components. That way is probably more in line with Agilent's license requirements and you don't need to swell your vxe with what after it's first run becomes tens of megabytes of useless baggage. As far as look-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used to believe that the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that it was ported from HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of X emulation for drawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If that's not the case then I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you get a Windows focus rectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE. When you call TranslateAccelerator, you get hot keys and keyboard control of UI elements that contain underlines, not a list of function keys that can optionally be assigned to buttons. Windows defines a large number of standard window classes for objects such as menus, buttons, list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5 anyway) does not use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own way and uses it's own window classes to do so. The end result is this non-standard look-and-feel, and I agree with those who say that more effort needs to go into cleaning up this non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the direction of standards, but it remains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the past will be rectified. -SHAWN- --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Chris.Gove@plantronics.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Willie.Kiely@bourns.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". </BLOCKQUOTE>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
willie.kiely Oct 30, 2003 8:34 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"><TITLE>RE: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7</TITLE><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR></HEAD><BODY><DIV>One powerful thing Labview does NOT have is ....I think?...... the formula input control pin in the formula box. In vee you can write your engine, and have users just changing text files to adjust formulas....even referencing variables from the development code, that Vee just brings in as text strings into the formula box, without interfering with the development code of the engine.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Let me know if this is not the case in LabView.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Regards,</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV> </DIV><BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left>-----Original Message----- From: Gove, Chris [mailto:Chris.Gove@plantronics.com] Sent: 31 October 2003 20:15 To: VEE vrf Cc: 'vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com' Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 </DIV> I'm a longtime user of VEE..(Work force management victim of from Agilent).. New user of LabView (ver7)....my opinon..the only thing Vee rivals LabView in is speed of development..And for me the jury's still out on that..(this isn't sour grapes talking).. -----Original Message----- From: Shawn Fessenden [<A href="mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com">mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com</A>] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:51 AM To: VEE vrf Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 > I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still > lacks some simple requirements. I understand. I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support & whatnot. You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few words that will maybe help clarify what Ken was saying: > They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded. When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces) writes programs anymore. We all write applications. A program is a self-contained unit that consists of all the code and data necessary to get any particular job done. An application is more or less an executive driver that uses the services of other units or components and an operating system that have been put together in a particular fashion to get a particular job done. At the operating system level, this collection of services is usually called an Application Programming Interface - API. On higher levels, they are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or software components of one kind or other - ActiveX, the more general COM, .Net - whatever. I think the point Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if the finished product is anything but a true program it's going to rely on the services of external entities. We who use compiled languages usually have the option of creating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS API calls because we can statically link with support object (here meaning a file that's an intermediate step between compile and link) libraries to include all the support code necessary to implement the abstractions we take for granted on the high-level language plateau. All the relevant code from the MFC dlls is linked in (or of course whatever abstractions are provided by your compiler vendor that are optionally statically linked with your finished application), all the code from the C RTL is linked in, and the only things left external are Win32 API calls to a few DLLs. Now, this simply isn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The resulting executables are truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of megabytes, but it's an option. VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give you that option. The support libraries must always exist on the target machine, and because no machine comes with VEE or LabView installed you must install at least their run time support components in order to use any VEE or LabView application. This is simply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's worth mentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's run time libraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the run time, but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components, include them in your vxe and simply have it silently install and register whatever is necessary if those components don't already exist on the target machine. Or break it up: have the installer in a separate VEE library and import it if necessary. Or, what's more feasible is to simply use a third-party installer product who's primary job is to install the VEE run time components. That way is probably more in line with Agilent's license requirements and you don't need to swell your vxe with what after it's first run becomes tens of megabytes of useless baggage. As far as look-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used to believe that the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that it was ported from HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of X emulation for drawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If that's not the case then I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you get a Windows focus rectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE. When you call TranslateAccelerator, you get hot keys and keyboard control of UI elements that contain underlines, not a list of function keys that can optionally be assigned to buttons. Windows defines a large number of standard window classes for objects such as menus, buttons, list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5 anyway) does not use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own way and uses it's own window classes to do so. The end result is this non-standard look-and-feel, and I agree with those who say that more effort needs to go into cleaning up this non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the direction of standards, but it remains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the past will be rectified. -SHAWN- --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Chris.Gove@plantronics.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Willie.Kiely@bourns.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". </BLOCKQUOTE>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 8:45 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><TITLE>Message</TITLE><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1226" name=GENERATOR></HEAD><BODY><DIV>It well be a little while before I'm at that level in LabView I'm afraid..</DIV><DIV></DIV><DIV>I shouldn't be so quick with the comparisons..the main difference for me so far is the Panel/GUI ...</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV> -----Original Message----- From: Willie Kiely [mailto:Willie.Kiely@bourns.com] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 12:34 PM To: 'Gove, Chris'; VEE vrf Subject: RE: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 </DIV><BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV>One powerful thing Labview does NOT have is ....I think?...... the formula input control pin in the formula box. In vee you can write your engine, and have users just changing text files to adjust formulas....even referencing variables from the development code, that Vee just brings in as text strings into the formula box, without interfering with the development code of the engine.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Let me know if this is not the case in LabView.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Regards,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left>-----Original Message----- From: Gove, Chris [mailto:Chris.Gove@plantronics.com] Sent: 31 October 2003 20:15 To: VEE vrf Cc: 'vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com' Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 </DIV> I'm a longtime user of VEE..(Work force management victim of from Agilent).. New user of LabView (ver7)....my opinon..the only thing Vee rivals LabView in is speed of development..And for me the jury's still out on that..(this isn't sour grapes talking).. -----Original Message----- From: Shawn Fessenden [<A href="mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com">mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com</A>] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:51 AM To: VEE vrf Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 > I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still > lacks some simple requirements. I understand. I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support & whatnot. You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few words that will maybe help clarify what Ken was saying: > They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded. When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces) writes programs anymore. We all write applications. A program is a self-contained unit that consists of all the code and data necessary to get any particular job done. An application is more or less an executive driver that uses the services of other units or components and an operating system that have been put together in a particular fashion to get a particular job done. At the operating system level, this collection of services is usually called an Application Programming Interface - API. On higher levels, they are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or software components of one kind or other - ActiveX, the more general COM, .Net - whatever. I think the point Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if the finished product is anything but a true program it's going to rely on the services of external entities. We who use compiled languages usually have the option of creating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS API calls because we can statically link with support object (here meaning a file that's an intermediate step between compile and link) libraries to include all the support code necessary to implement the abstractions we take for granted on the high-level language plateau. All the relevant code from the MFC dlls is linked in (or of course whatever abstractions are provided by your compiler vendor that are optionally statically linked with your finished application), all the code from the C RTL is linked in, and the only things left external are Win32 API calls to a few DLLs. Now, this simply isn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The resulting executables are truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of megabytes, but it's an option. VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give you that option. The support libraries must always exist on the target machine, and because no machine comes with VEE or LabView installed you must install at least their run time support components in order to use any VEE or LabView application. This is simply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's worth mentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's run time libraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the run time, but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components, include them in your vxe and simply have it silently install and register whatever is necessary if those components don't already exist on the target machine. Or break it up: have the installer in a separate VEE library and import it if necessary. Or, what's more feasible is to simply use a third-party installer product who's primary job is to install the VEE run time components. That way is probably more in line with Agilent's license requirements and you don't need to swell your vxe with what after it's first run becomes tens of megabytes of useless baggage. As far as look-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used to believe that the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that it was ported from HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of X emulation for drawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If that's not the case then I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you get a Windows focus rectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE. When you call TranslateAccelerator, you get hot keys and keyboard control of UI elements that contain underlines, not a list of function keys that can optionally be assigned to buttons. Windows defines a large number of standard window classes for objects such as menus, buttons, list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5 anyway) does not use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own way and uses it's own window classes to do so. The end result is this non-standard look-and-feel, and I agree with those who say that more effort needs to go into cleaning up this non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the direction of standards, but it remains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the past will be rectified. -SHAWN- --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Chris.Gove@plantronics.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Willie.Kiely@bourns.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 8:45 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><TITLE>Message</TITLE><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1226" name=GENERATOR></HEAD><BODY><DIV>It well be a little while before I'm at that level in LabView I'm afraid..</DIV><DIV></DIV><DIV>I shouldn't be so quick with the comparisons..the main difference for me so far is the Panel/GUI ...</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV> -----Original Message----- From: Willie Kiely [mailto:Willie.Kiely@bourns.com] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 12:34 PM To: 'Gove, Chris'; VEE vrf Subject: RE: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 </DIV><BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> <DIV>One powerful thing Labview does NOT have is ....I think?...... the formula input control pin in the formula box. In vee you can write your engine, and have users just changing text files to adjust formulas....even referencing variables from the development code, that Vee just brings in as text strings into the formula box, without interfering with the development code of the engine.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Let me know if this is not the case in LabView.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Regards,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left>-----Original Message----- From: Gove, Chris [mailto:Chris.Gove@plantronics.com] Sent: 31 October 2003 20:15 To: VEE vrf Cc: 'vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com' Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 </DIV> I'm a longtime user of VEE..(Work force management victim of from Agilent).. New user of LabView (ver7)....my opinon..the only thing Vee rivals LabView in is speed of development..And for me the jury's still out on that..(this isn't sour grapes talking).. -----Original Message----- From: Shawn Fessenden [<A href="mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com">mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com</A>] Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:51 AM To: VEE vrf Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7 > I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still > lacks some simple requirements. I understand. I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support & whatnot. You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few words that will maybe help clarify what Ken was saying: > They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded. When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces) writes programs anymore. We all write applications. A program is a self-contained unit that consists of all the code and data necessary to get any particular job done. An application is more or less an executive driver that uses the services of other units or components and an operating system that have been put together in a particular fashion to get a particular job done. At the operating system level, this collection of services is usually called an Application Programming Interface - API. On higher levels, they are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or software components of one kind or other - ActiveX, the more general COM, .Net - whatever. I think the point Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if the finished product is anything but a true program it's going to rely on the services of external entities. We who use compiled languages usually have the option of creating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS API calls because we can statically link with support object (here meaning a file that's an intermediate step between compile and link) libraries to include all the support code necessary to implement the abstractions we take for granted on the high-level language plateau. All the relevant code from the MFC dlls is linked in (or of course whatever abstractions are provided by your compiler vendor that are optionally statically linked with your finished application), all the code from the C RTL is linked in, and the only things left external are Win32 API calls to a few DLLs. Now, this simply isn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The resulting executables are truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of megabytes, but it's an option. VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give you that option. The support libraries must always exist on the target machine, and because no machine comes with VEE or LabView installed you must install at least their run time support components in order to use any VEE or LabView application. This is simply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's worth mentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's run time libraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the run time, but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components, include them in your vxe and simply have it silently install and register whatever is necessary if those components don't already exist on the target machine. Or break it up: have the installer in a separate VEE library and import it if necessary. Or, what's more feasible is to simply use a third-party installer product who's primary job is to install the VEE run time components. That way is probably more in line with Agilent's license requirements and you don't need to swell your vxe with what after it's first run becomes tens of megabytes of useless baggage. As far as look-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used to believe that the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that it was ported from HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of X emulation for drawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If that's not the case then I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you get a Windows focus rectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE. When you call TranslateAccelerator, you get hot keys and keyboard control of UI elements that contain underlines, not a list of function keys that can optionally be assigned to buttons. Windows defines a large number of standard window classes for objects such as menus, buttons, list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5 anyway) does not use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own way and uses it's own window classes to do so. The end result is this non-standard look-and-feel, and I agree with those who say that more effort needs to go into cleaning up this non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the direction of standards, but it remains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the past will be rectified. -SHAWN- --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Chris.Gove@plantronics.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". --- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Willie.Kiely@bourns.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 8:51 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
> I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still lacks
> some simple requirements.

I understand. I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support
& whatnot. You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few
words that will maybe help clarify what Ken was saying:

> They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded.

When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces)
writes programs anymore. We all write applications. A program is a
self-contained unit that consists of all the code and data necessary to get
any particular job done. An application is more or less an executive driver
that uses the services of other units or components and an operating system
that have been put together in a particular fashion to get a particular job
done. At the operating system level, this collection of services is usually
called an Application Programming Interface - API. On higher levels, they
are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or
software components of one kind or other - ActiveX, the more general COM,
.Net - whatever.

I think the point Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if
the finished product is anything but a true program it's going to rely on
the services of external entities. We who use compiled languages usually
have the option of creating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS
API calls because we can statically link with support object (here meaning a
file that's an intermediate step between compile and link) libraries to
include all the support code necessary to implement the abstractions we take
for granted on the high-level language plateau. All the relevant code from
the MFC dlls is linked in (or of course whatever abstractions are provided
by your compiler vendor that are optionally statically linked with your
finished application), all the code from the C RTL is linked in, and the
only things left external are Win32 API calls to a few DLLs.

Now, this simply isn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The
resulting executables are truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of
megabytes, but it's an option. VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give
you that option. The support libraries must always exist on the target
machine, and because no machine comes with VEE or LabView installed you must
install at least their run time support components in order to use any VEE
or LabView application.

This is simply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's
worth mentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's
run time libraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the
run time, but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components,
include them in your vxe and simply have it silently install and register
whatever is necessary if those components don't already exist on the target
machine. Or break it up: have the installer in a separate VEE library and
import it if necessary. Or, what's more feasible is to simply use a
third-party installer product who's primary job is to install the VEE run
time components. That way is probably more in line with Agilent's license
requirements and you don't need to swell your vxe with what after it's first
run becomes tens of megabytes of useless baggage.

As far as look-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used
to believe that the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that
it was ported from HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of
X emulation for drawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If
that's not the case then I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you
get a Windows focus rectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE.
When you call TranslateAccelerator, you get hot keys and keyboard control of
UI elements that contain underlines, not a list of function keys that can
optionally be assigned to buttons.

Windows defines a large number of standard window classes for objects such
as menus, buttons, list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5
anyway) does not use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own
way and uses it's own window classes to do so. The end result is this
non-standard look-and-feel, and I agree with those who say that more effort
needs to go into cleaning up this non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the
direction of standards, but it remains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the
past will be rectified.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 8:51 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
> I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still lacks
> some simple requirements.

I understand. I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support
& whatnot. You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few
words that will maybe help clarify what Ken was saying:

> They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded.

When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces)
writes programs anymore. We all write applications. A program is a
self-contained unit that consists of all the code and data necessary to get
any particular job done. An application is more or less an executive driver
that uses the services of other units or components and an operating system
that have been put together in a particular fashion to get a particular job
done. At the operating system level, this collection of services is usually
called an Application Programming Interface - API. On higher levels, they
are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or
software components of one kind or other - ActiveX, the more general COM,
.Net - whatever.

I think the point Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if
the finished product is anything but a true program it's going to rely on
the services of external entities. We who use compiled languages usually
have the option of creating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS
API calls because we can statically link with support object (here meaning a
file that's an intermediate step between compile and link) libraries to
include all the support code necessary to implement the abstractions we take
for granted on the high-level language plateau. All the relevant code from
the MFC dlls is linked in (or of course whatever abstractions are provided
by your compiler vendor that are optionally statically linked with your
finished application), all the code from the C RTL is linked in, and the
only things left external are Win32 API calls to a few DLLs.

Now, this simply isn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The
resulting executables are truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of
megabytes, but it's an option. VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give
you that option. The support libraries must always exist on the target
machine, and because no machine comes with VEE or LabView installed you must
install at least their run time support components in order to use any VEE
or LabView application.

This is simply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's
worth mentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's
run time libraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the
run time, but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components,
include them in your vxe and simply have it silently install and register
whatever is necessary if those components don't already exist on the target
machine. Or break it up: have the installer in a separate VEE library and
import it if necessary. Or, what's more feasible is to simply use a
third-party installer product who's primary job is to install the VEE run
time components. That way is probably more in line with Agilent's license
requirements and you don't need to swell your vxe with what after it's first
run becomes tens of megabytes of useless baggage.

As far as look-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used
to believe that the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that
it was ported from HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of
X emulation for drawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If
that's not the case then I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you
get a Windows focus rectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE.
When you call TranslateAccelerator, you get hot keys and keyboard control of
UI elements that contain underlines, not a list of function keys that can
optionally be assigned to buttons.

Windows defines a large number of standard window classes for objects such
as menus, buttons, list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5
anyway) does not use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own
way and uses it's own window classes to do so. The end result is this
non-standard look-and-feel, and I agree with those who say that more effort
needs to go into cleaning up this non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the
direction of standards, but it remains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the
past will be rectified.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 9:14 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
> Unfortunately, most of our System Spec's have comments like "Standard
> Windows File menus shall be utilized", "Standard Windows Help features
> shall be utilized" etc. So the PO never gets submitted unless we bid
> the development platform to be Visual C++.

Way unfortunate. In this case there's really not a whole lot you can do
except explain that "we wanted to verify our basic design..." I'm sure you
know about how far that usually goes

> 2. Tool Tips

It may sound petty, but that's on my pet peeve list too

Certainly #4 would help immensely. I agree a hunnert percent.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 9:14 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
> Unfortunately, most of our System Spec's have comments like "Standard
> Windows File menus shall be utilized", "Standard Windows Help features
> shall be utilized" etc. So the PO never gets submitted unless we bid
> the development platform to be Visual C++.

Way unfortunate. In this case there's really not a whole lot you can do
except explain that "we wanted to verify our basic design..." I'm sure you
know about how far that usually goes

> 2. Tool Tips

It may sound petty, but that's on my pet peeve list too

Certainly #4 would help immensely. I agree a hunnert percent.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
mark.goldberg Oct 30, 2003 9:29 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Shawn,

I had set up the program to auto-install everything and sent them a sample
panel. They did not like the VEE runtime window that opened prior to the
application starting. Also they had a problem with support since there are
not as many VEE programmers as there are C++. I told them I would provide
free support for one year to work out the bugs. This was two years ago and I
beleive VEE 5.0.

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:51 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

> I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still lacks
> some simple requirements.

I understand. I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support
& whatnot. You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few
words that will maybe help clarify what Ken was saying:

> They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded.

When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces)
writes programs anymore. We all write applications. A program is a
self-contained unit that consists of all the code and data necessary to get
any particular job done. An application is more or less an executive driver
that uses the services of other units or components and an operating system
that have been put together in a particular fashion to get a particular job
done. At the operating system level, this collection of services is usually
called an Application Programming Interface - API. On higher levels, they
are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or
software components of one kind or other - ActiveX, the more general COM,
.Net - whatever.

I think the point Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if
the finished product is anything but a true program it's going to rely on
the services of external entities. We who use compiled languages usually
have the option of creating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS
API calls because we can statically link with support object (here meaning a
file that's an intermediate step between compile and link) libraries to
include all the support code necessary to implement the abstractions we take
for granted on the high-level language plateau. All the relevant code from
the MFC dlls is linked in (or of course whatever abstractions are provided
by your compiler vendor that are optionally statically linked with your
finished application), all the code from the C RTL is linked in, and the
only things left external are Win32 API calls to a few DLLs.

Now, this simply isn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The
resulting executables are truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of
megabytes, but it's an option. VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give
you that option. The support libraries must always exist on the target
machine, and because no machine comes with VEE or LabView installed you must
install at least their run time support components in order to use any VEE
or LabView application.

This is simply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's
worth mentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's
run time libraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the
run time, but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components,
include them in your vxe and simply have it silently install and register
whatever is necessary if those components don't already exist on the target
machine. Or break it up: have the installer in a separate VEE library and
import it if necessary. Or, what's more feasible is to simply use a
third-party installer product who's primary job is to install the VEE run
time components. That way is probably more in line with Agilent's license
requirements and you don't need to swell your vxe with what after it's first
run becomes tens of megabytes of useless baggage.

As far as look-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used
to believe that the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that
it was ported from HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of
X emulation for drawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If
that's not the case then I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you
get a Windows focus rectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE.
When you call TranslateAccelerator, you get hot keys and keyboard control of
UI elements that contain underlines, not a list of function keys that can
optionally be assigned to buttons.

Windows defines a large number of standard window classes for objects such
as menus, buttons, list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5
anyway) does not use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own
way and uses it's own window classes to do so. The end result is this
non-standard look-and-feel, and I agree with those who say that more effort
needs to go into cleaning up this non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the
direction of standards, but it remains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the
past will be rectified.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
mark.goldberg Oct 30, 2003 9:29 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Shawn,

I had set up the program to auto-install everything and sent them a sample
panel. They did not like the VEE runtime window that opened prior to the
application starting. Also they had a problem with support since there are
not as many VEE programmers as there are C++. I told them I would provide
free support for one year to work out the bugs. This was two years ago and I
beleive VEE 5.0.

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:51 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

> I agree with your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still lacks
> some simple requirements.

I understand. I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support
& whatnot. You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few
words that will maybe help clarify what Ken was saying:

> They did not like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded.

When you really split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces)
writes programs anymore. We all write applications. A program is a
self-contained unit that consists of all the code and data necessary to get
any particular job done. An application is more or less an executive driver
that uses the services of other units or components and an operating system
that have been put together in a particular fashion to get a particular job
done. At the operating system level, this collection of services is usually
called an Application Programming Interface - API. On higher levels, they
are called Dynamic Link Libraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or
software components of one kind or other - ActiveX, the more general COM,
.Net - whatever.

I think the point Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if
the finished product is anything but a true program it's going to rely on
the services of external entities. We who use compiled languages usually
have the option of creating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS
API calls because we can statically link with support object (here meaning a
file that's an intermediate step between compile and link) libraries to
include all the support code necessary to implement the abstractions we take
for granted on the high-level language plateau. All the relevant code from
the MFC dlls is linked in (or of course whatever abstractions are provided
by your compiler vendor that are optionally statically linked with your
finished application), all the code from the C RTL is linked in, and the
only things left external are Win32 API calls to a few DLLs.

Now, this simply isn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The
resulting executables are truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of
megabytes, but it's an option. VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give
you that option. The support libraries must always exist on the target
machine, and because no machine comes with VEE or LabView installed you must
install at least their run time support components in order to use any VEE
or LabView application.

This is simply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's
worth mentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's
run time libraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the
run time, but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components,
include them in your vxe and simply have it silently install and register
whatever is necessary if those components don't already exist on the target
machine. Or break it up: have the installer in a separate VEE library and
import it if necessary. Or, what's more feasible is to simply use a
third-party installer product who's primary job is to install the VEE run
time components. That way is probably more in line with Agilent's license
requirements and you don't need to swell your vxe with what after it's first
run becomes tens of megabytes of useless baggage.

As far as look-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used
to believe that the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that
it was ported from HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of
X emulation for drawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If
that's not the case then I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you
get a Windows focus rectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE.
When you call TranslateAccelerator, you get hot keys and keyboard control of
UI elements that contain underlines, not a list of function keys that can
optionally be assigned to buttons.

Windows defines a large number of standard window classes for objects such
as menus, buttons, list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5
anyway) does not use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own
way and uses it's own window classes to do so. The end result is this
non-standard look-and-feel, and I agree with those who say that more effort
needs to go into cleaning up this non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the
direction of standards, but it remains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the
past will be rectified.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Mark.Goldberg@ATK.COM
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
jay.johannes Oct 30, 2003 11:03 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 9"><meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 9"><link rel=File-List href="cid:filelist.xml@01C39FC0.19E856A0"><title>Message</title><style></style></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue style='tab-interval:.5in'><div class=Section1><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Arial'>I thinkthe equivalent would be the eval formula node as described below.<spanstyle="mso-spacerun: yes"> This allows you to have variables tiedto front panel controls so the user can adjust. It is in the advanced math add-in or the professionaldevelopment pack.<o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Arial'><![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Arial'>FromLabVIEW help.<o:p></o:p><h1>Eval Formula Node (Not in Base Package) <fontcolor=navy><o:p></o:p></h1>Similar to theFormula Node function but with variables that can be entered on the frontpanel. Refer to <ahref="Parser_VIs_in_More_Detail.html">Formula VIs in More Detail</a> for moreinformation on the differences between the Eval Formula Node VI and the <ahref="glang.chm::/Formula_Node.html">Formula Node</a> function. <ahref="#details">Details</a> <spanstyle='color:navy;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p></div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Arial'><![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:Arial'><![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p><fontcolor=navy>Jay Nemeth-Johannes<fontcolor=navy><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'>Complete Test<fontcolor=navy><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'>720 14th Street SW<fontcolor=navy><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'>Loveland, CO 80537<fontcolor=navy><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'>(970) 663-0006<fontcolor=navy><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'>www.completetest.com <fontcolor=navy><o:p></o:p><spanclass=EmailStyle18><![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p>-----OriginalMessage-----
From: Gove, Chris[mailto:Chris.Gove@plantronics.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 20031:45 PM
To: VEE vrf
Cc: 'vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com'
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent VeePro 7<spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt'><![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>It well be a little whilebefore I'm at that level in LabView I'm afraid..<fontcolor=black><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>I shouldn't be so quickwith the comparisons..the main difference for me so far is the Panel/GUI ...<fontcolor=black><o:p></o:p> <fontcolor=black><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'> <fontsize=2 color=black face=Tahoma>-----Original Message-----
From: Willie Kiely[mailto:Willie.Kiely@bourns.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 200312:34 PM
To: 'Gove, Chris'; VEE vrf
Subject: RE: [vrf] RE: Fw: AgilentVee Pro 7<spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p>One powerful thing Labview does NOThave is ....I think?...... the formula input control pin in the formula box. Invee you can write your engine, and have users just changing text files toadjust formulas....even referencing variables from the development code, thatVee just brings in as text strings into the formula box, without interferingwith the development code of the engine.<spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> <spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p>Let me know if this is not the case inLabView.<o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> <spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p>Regards,<spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> <spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'> <spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma;color:black'>-----OriginalMessage-----
From: Gove, Chris[mailto:Chris.Gove@plantronics.com]
Sent: 31 October 2003 20:15
To: VEE vrf
Cc: 'vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com'
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent VeePro 7<o:p></o:p>I'm alongtime user of VEE..(Work force management victim of from Agilent)..<fontcolor=black>
New user of LabView (ver7)....my opinon..the only thing Vee rivalsLabView in is speed of
development..And for me the jury's still out on that..(this isn'tsour grapes talking)..<o:p></o:p>-----OriginalMessage-----
From: Shawn Fessenden [<a href="mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com">mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com</a>]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 10:51 AM<fontcolor=black>
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7<fontcolor=black> <spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><fontcolor=black><o:p></o:p>> I agreewith your interpreter part of this post, however, VEE still <fontcolor=black>
> lacks some simple requirements.<fontcolor=black> <spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p>I understand.I've also had many issues with look and feel, runtime support & whatnot.You've got a good point here and I'd like to say another few words that willmaybe help clarify what Ken was saying:<spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p>> They didnot like the fact that VEE Runtime had to first be loaded.<fontcolor=black> <spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p>When youreally split hairs, nobody (except maybe NASA and the armed forces) writesprograms anymore. We all write applications. A program is a self-contained unitthat consists of all the code and data necessary to get any particular jobdone. An application is more or less an executive driver that uses the servicesof other units or components and an operating system that have been puttogether in a particular fashion to get a particular job done. At the operatingsystem level, this collection of services is usually called an ApplicationProgramming Interface - API. On higher levels, they are called Dynamic LinkLibraries (DLLs), Run Time Libraries (RTL) or software components of one kindor other - ActiveX, the more general COM, .Net - whatever.<fontcolor=black><o:p></o:p>I think thepoint Ken was making is that no matter what language you use, if the finishedproduct is anything but a true program it's going to rely on the services ofexternal entities. We who use compiled languages usually have the option ofcreating almost honest-to-goodness programs except for OS API calls because wecan statically link with support object (here meaning a file that's anintermediate step between compile and link) libraries to include all thesupport code necessary to implement the abstractions we take for granted on thehigh-level language plateau. All the relevant code from the MFC dlls is linkedin (or of course whatever abstractions are provided by your compiler vendorthat are optionally statically linked with your finished application), all thecode from the C RTL is linked in, and the only things left external are Win32API calls to a few DLLs.<o:p></o:p>Now, this simplyisn't practical and almost nobody does this anymore. The resulting executablesare truly massive beasts of tens or hundreds of megabytes, but it's an option.VEE and (to my knowledge) LabView don't give you that option. The supportlibraries must always exist on the target machine, and because no machine comeswith VEE or LabView installed you must install at least their run time supportcomponents in order to use any VEE or LabView application.<fontcolor=black><o:p></o:p>This issimply the way of component software, and it always will be. It's worthmentioning that your customer (maybe) doesn't need to know about VEE's run timelibraries. I don't know the details of Agilent's licensing for the run time,but it may be ok to identify the necessary run time components, include them inyour vxe and simply have it silently install and register whatever is necessaryif those components don't already exist on the target machine. Or break it up:have the installer in a separate VEE library and import it if necessary. Or,what's more feasible is to simply use a third-party installer product who'sprimary job is to install the VEE run time components. That way is probablymore in line with Agilent's license requirements and you don't need to swellyour vxe with what after it's first run becomes tens of megabytes of uselessbaggage.<o:p></o:p>As far aslook-and-feel goes, I've given up trying to figure it out. I used to believethat the unique look-and-feel of VEE stemmed from the fact that it was portedfrom HP-UX and the run time probably contained a great deal of X emulation fordrawing and user interaction, but I'm not so sure now. If that's not the casethen I can't explain it. When you call DrawFocusRect you get a Windows focusrectangle, not what passes for the same thing in VEE. When you call TranslateAccelerator,you get hot keys and keyboard control of UI elements that contain underlines,not a list of function keys that can optionally be assigned to buttons.<fontcolor=black><o:p></o:p>Windowsdefines a large number of standard window classes for objects such as menus, buttons,list boxes, tool bars and so on, but VEE (as of version 5<fontcolor=black><o:p></o:p>anyway) doesnot use these classes - it draws it's own objects in it's own way and uses it'sown window classes to do so. The end result is this non-standard look-and-feel,and I agree with those who say that more effort needs to go into cleaning upthis non-standardness. VEE is now headed in the direction of standards, but itremains to be seen if the "mistakes" of the past will be rectified.<fontcolor=black><o:p></o:p>-SHAWN-<fontcolor=black> <spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><fontcolor=black><o:p></o:p>---<fontcolor=black>
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Chris.Gove@plantronics.comTo subscribe send a blank email to"join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".<spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p>Tounsubscribe send a blank email to"leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".<spanstyle='color:black'>
To send messages to this mailing list, email"vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". <spanstyle='color:black'>
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".<spanstyle='color:black'> <o:p></o:p><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: Willie.Kiely@bourns.com
To subscribe send a blank email to"join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to"leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email"vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". <spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p>---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jay.johannes@completetest.com
To subscribe send a blank email to"join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to"leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email"vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". <spanstyle='color:black;mso-color-alt:windowtext'><o:p></o:p></div>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></html>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 30, 2003 11:59 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
> While we may have faith in VEE, our customers may not. When they see
> strange .vxe file names they may be concerned about the long term
> viability of the product.

Yes - nobody ever wants to throw development time out the window, and I
don't blame customers for being suspicious of strange file extensions. Maybe
the VEE compiler could be modified to produce an exe stub that checks for
the installation of the VEE runtime and then executes the vxe code as a
resource of the exe stub. Much like the old "This program requires Microsoft
Windows" stub.
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
jcmartin Oct 31, 2003 1:12 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer

I agree... but not with all.

I agree more with other message. VEE "must" upgrade or died. It is so simple.

Does somebody remember old days of VEE 3.2x or 4.0? It seems a lot of time, but not so old, 4.0 about 5 years. If VEE does not upgrade in a couple of years will be out of order. It is so simple.

I agree that VEE is very flexible and can be used for a lot of different tasks. However one of the most important ones is the task of provide professional applications to different customers. Maybe some MS applications could be more nice to the eye, however, the money is also very important and VEE is very good to provide an application in a faster way than traditional. However, why do not include more friendly (or better said, more known) ways to interface with operators in VEE? VEE need not only be good, but popular. Is the best OS the most popular? Is the best TV tape recorder most popular? Not always the best win. Lot of times the best (from TECHNICAL point of view) disappears quickly.

I also think that VEE should be improved in such a way. It is not very good to upgrade the VEE possibilities by using ActiveX. This seems not only to develop and maintain one application, but one application and a lot of little programs. From maintenance point of view is crazy. I would like to use ActiveX as less as possible for professional applications in order to upgrade the future maintenance. Update a VEE program to a new version (7.0 for example, would means not only to update the vee file, but update all the ActiveX and more important TO TEST if it works fine). Maybe it is not very complicated with VEE update but if we upgrade the OS to future Windows X (more or less than X Files), probably is not so easy.

>From my point of view VEE should improve in a lot of areas, because a lot of time has been lost with version 6.1 and its famous licence manager. Socket communication, USB support, Firewire support, LINUX support, etc...

One of the most important points for me is not the execution speed but the execution of priority levels and events. Being able to select if one function has a high or low priority execution level.

On the other hand, it does not matter if the execution is very fast if the application has to communicate to a very slow equipment/device. But it is very important to be able to program the communication by events instead of traditional control flow. It means: OK the equipment is slow, but I can do other things meanwhile I wait for the answer. I do not need to wait more time than necessary (limit reply time) because the first bit I will receive in the port, the corresponding reading task will be activated again and I will read the equipment reply information as faster as possible. This would be do independently (more or less) if the VEE is itself more or less fast.

I could continue, but maybe is better stop before somebody sleep with my ideas.

cheers!

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Shawn Fessenden [mailto:shawn@testech-ltd.com]
> Enviado el: viernes, 31 de octubre de 2003 10:15
> Para: VEE vrf
> Asunto: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7
>
>
> > The ability to generate an EXE instead of a VXE
>
> I asked about that at VEE Days. The question was:
>
> Is there an x86 compiler anywhere in VEE's future?
>
> The answer was:
>
> No.
>
> The representatives present explained that they felt that
> emulation was not
> such a big deal any more, processor speeds being what they are. The
> background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> pseudo-machine - not an x86 architecture machine. The emulator is
> responsible for running this "pseudo-code" on the
> "pseudo-machine", which is
> emulated by the VEE runtime.
>
> The situation is similar with Java. Java *is* compiled and it
> *does* run on
> any machine, but only as long as the Java Virtual Machine is
> installed on
> the target. The VEE runtime is like the JVM in this case. A vxe will
> (theoretically) run on any machine as long as the VEE runtime
> is installed.
> Windows NT (until recently) ran on a wide variety of
> architectures too, and
> as long as VEE is strictly a Win32 application then VEE will
> (theoretically)
> run on those machines as well.
>
> This is why I'm always saying that VEE is an interpreted
> language. No matter
> how you slice it, VEE is being interpreted by the runtime. In
> my mind (no
> jokes, please , any emulator is always an interpreter.
>
> Personally, I also would like to see a "real" VEE compiler,
> but I have to
> admit that Agilent has a point here. Emulation *is* getting
> to be less and
> less of an issue these days. One day in the not-too-distant
> future, the
> point will become moot as our processors will reconfigure
> themselves to suit
> our needs, and we will not be limited to any particular architecture.
>
> Until that day comes however, yes: any compiled x86
> executable will always
> be faster than an equivalent VEE program, but the relevant
> questions are
> "what kind of speed do you need?", and "what kind of
> programming facilities
> do you need?". VEE has plenty of speed to do most anything,
> and don't forget
> it has a specific target audience. It's attractive to non-programmers
> because it's easy to learn and use, and (IMO) it's attractive to
> power-programmers for the very reason that interpreters have
> always been
> attractive: there are no compile-link steps necessary to see
> results. You
> can throw something together very quickly and see results right now.
>
> When there are a few hundred thousand dollars hanging on a
> demonstration of
> functionality, I'll take the easy road thank you very much!
> The hell with UI
> perfection or blazing speed, all that's important is the PO.
> Once that's
> signed then the niceties can be worked out. And if the
> customer does make
> some kind of demand at that moment, well if possible I'd
> rather dive in
> right then and rearrange some things right in front of his or her eyes
> rather than say "same time, same place, next week."
>
> I regularly use a few different languages for different
> purposes, but so far
> VEE is the only one that has been cross-purpose. I use it to
> test-bed ideas,
> and I use it to produce work. I use Q-Basic a lot, but I sure
> don't deliver
> applications in it. I also use C++ a lot, but I don't usually
> sit down and
> brainstorm with it.
> -SHAWN-
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to vrf as: jcmartin@indra.es
> To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> To send messages to this mailing list, email
> "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
> If you need help with the mailing list send a message to
> "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Este correo electrnico y, en su caso, cualquier fichero anexo al mismo, contiene informacin de carcter confidencial exclusivamente dirigida a su destinatario o destinatarios. Queda prohibida su divulgacin, copia o distribucin a terceros sin la previa autorizacin escrita de Indra. En el caso de haber recibido este correo electrnico por error, se ruega notificar inmediatamente esta circunstancia mediante reenvo a la direccin electrnica del remitente.

The information in this e-mail and in any attachments is confidential and solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s). You are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this communication is prohibited without the prior written consent of Indra. If you have received this communication in error, please, notify the sender by reply e-mail

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Oct 31, 2003 5:32 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
> The background clarification for those who don't know is that a vxe *is*
> "compiled" in every sense of the term, but it's compiled for a
> pseudo-machine

We got a Conceptual Bogue here. Apparently the vxe is *not* compiled p-code,
but simply "compressed/encrypted" VEE source. The compiling and compiled
code is never seen by the outside world. Since we already know that there's
no x86 involved, I'm still sticking by the interpreted p-code theory of
internal execution - unless I learn differently that is :0
-SHAWN-

---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Nov 3, 2003 10:07 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><html><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10 (filtered)"><style></style></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue><div class=Section1>Peter (and anyone else…) We have heard the request to “have access toUSB” just a few times. But we are never quite sure what you would do with it. Could you describe any “use cases” of whatyou would like to do? Thanks, Ken <spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>-----Original Message-----
From: P.Weber-pcmess[mailto:p.weber@pcmess.de]
Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 20037:50 AM
To: VEE vrf
Subject: [vrf] RE: Fw: Agilent VeePro 7<spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt'> <div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Hello all,</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>I had difficulties to follow thediscussion on VEE 7 (mainly about VEE against others: LabView i.e.)</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>But now I finished reading andunderstanding.</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>So, I can give my opinion:</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Since VEE 3.1 I'm a VEEer.I joined VEE from LabWindows(DOS). </div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>It is true, that one cannot doeverything using VEE as easy as it might be with "so andso".</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>But if I consider, how difficult itis to do "programming of measurement and data-processing</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>and having a nice userinterface" with i.e. C or "so and so", I prefer VEE !!!</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>As we are programmers, we should-only- ask for advantages in speeding up programming.</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>My wish is to have better help/better objects within VEE for using ActiveX and/or other programms.</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>It is sometimes really fatiguing tosearch for a means of filling in " Execute Programm" or similar.</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>(This is TIME-CONSUMING, whatprogrammers don't like!)</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> </div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Of course, it is a must to haveaccess to USB etc !</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt'> </div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Peter</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><a href="http://www.pcmess.com">www.pcmess.com</a></div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Birkenweg 8</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>D-87677 Stoettwang</div><div><spanstyle='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>+49-8345-482</div><spanstyle='font-size:12.0pt'>---
You are currently subscribed to vrf as: ken_colasuonno@agilent.com
To subscribe send a blank email to"join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To unsubscribe send a blank email to"leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".
To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@agilent.com".
If you need help with the mailing list send a message to"owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". </div>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></html>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
VRFuser Nov 3, 2003 11:49 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML><HEAD><META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"><META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR><STYLE></STYLE></HEAD><BODY bgColor=#ffffff><DIV>Hello all,</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>I had difficulties to follow the discussion on VEE 7 (mainly about VEE against others: LabView i.e.)</DIV><DIV>But now I finished reading and understanding.</DIV><DIV>So, I can give my opinion:</DIV><DIV>Since VEE 3.1 I'm a VEEer. I joined VEE from LabWindows(DOS). </DIV><DIV>It is true, that one cannot do everything using VEE as easy as it might be with "so and so".</DIV><DIV>But if I consider, how difficult it is to do "programming of measurement and data-processing</DIV><DIV>and having a nice user interface" with i.e. C or "so and so", I prefer VEE !!!</DIV><DIV>As we are programmers, we should -only- ask for advantages in speeding up programming.</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>My wish is to have better help/ better objects within VEE for using ActiveX and/or other programms.</DIV><DIV>It is sometimes really fatiguing to search for a means of filling in " Execute Programm" or similar.</DIV><DIV>(This is TIME-CONSUMING, what programmers don't like!)</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Of course, it is a must to have access to USB etc !</DIV><DIV> </DIV><DIV>Peter</DIV><DIV><A href="http://www.pcmess.com">www.pcmess.com</A></DIV><DIV>Birkenweg 8</DIV><DIV>D-87677 Stoettwang</DIV><DIV>+49-8345-482</DIV>--- You are currently subscribed to vrf as: rsb@soco.agilent.com To subscribe send a blank email to "join-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To unsubscribe send a blank email to "leave-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com". To send messages to this mailing list, email "vrf@agilent.com". If you need help with the mailing list send a message to "owner-vrf@it.lists.it.agilent.com".</BODY></HTML>
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions

vrf Fw: Agilent Vee Pro 7

Outcomes

Related Content

Recommended Content