4 ms·

I honestly had to use LabVIEW to generate a heart pulse(simulation for a pacemaker). God I hated it so much, so much so as to make one my passwords "labviewsux"

• toyg 13y ago
  Eh, not much love lost for LabVIEW here as well. It put me off visual programming for good.
  • slacka 13y ago
    Yes, it's true LabVIEW has its own issues. It's a memory hog and the UI is cluttered and doesn't scale well for large projects. I don't think LV will be THE model for future programing, but I do think that its synchronous dataflow programming model could be part of the solutions to the concurrency issue that languages face today in the massively parallel domain. My experience was very different from yours. I couldn't believe how simple it was to add an additional test in parallel. It was just a copy/paste, update the functions, test parameters, and I/O. If only writing multithreaded code in C++ or Java was that simple. After my experience, I could see how LV could be a good fit for computer vision apps running on highly parallel architectures. It's too bad there not more modern, open dataflow languages out there. Massively complex modern CPUs wouldn't exist with tools like Verilog. As software grows in complexity, these tools may also offer some solutions on the software side.
• greenmountin 13y ago
  You may not like LabVIEW, but it is extremely useful in some areas. For lab scientists who need to iterate quickly between taking useful data and running the experiment, it's nice to just copy and paste instead of naming new variables, etc. Currently other solutions are either Matlab (which sounds soul-destroying) or Python (which is still nontrivial).