Check if LV, LVRT, and ECAT are installed before launching ECAT dialog #210
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Bleep bloop! LabVIEW Diff Robot here with some diffs served up hot for your pull request. Notice something funny? Help fix me on my GitHub repo. SEECD System Explorer.lvlib--Check Host Software Installed.vi.png
SEECD System Explorer.lvlib--Main - Manages 3rd Party Slaves.vi.png
|
buckd
approved these changes
May 2, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this Pull Request accomplish?
Check if LV, LVRT, and ECAT are installed before launching the "Manage 3rd-Party ECAT Slaves" dialog from the custom device main page. This was done by adding a sub VI to read the appropriate registry keys before launching the dialog (and all of the initialization logic that happens with it).
Throw an error if any components are missing:
Why should this Pull Request be merged?
This issue came up in escalation 1924218. The existing behavior is confusing, as several different errors can be thrown (as seen in #209).
What testing has been done?
Tested on VMs with: