Feature/issue 90 process case #91
Open
+98
−297
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
|
In principle I am supportive of this. |
|
@Tom-McQuillan good question. I'm not sure why I ran into this problem. Maybe I had created 'process.vi' and dropped in the template: Maybe I temporarily renamed it 'DoNotRunProcess.vi' for some other debugging purpose and then inadvertently renamed it 'process.vi' when I switched back. The main point is that LabVIEW doesn't recognize a difference and wouldn't, didn't, alert the user if the case didn't match. So hoping to save someone else in the future. I don't know if there is a more elegant fix available instead of: |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Summary
This PR addresses Issue #90 by making process name matching case-insensitive to align with LabVIEW's behavior when recognizing overrides.
Problem
LabVIEW recognizes overrides regardless of case (e.g., both
Process.viandprocess.viare valid), but our current implementation was case-sensitive. This mismatch could cause issues when process names didn't exactly match the expected case.Changes Made
GetCallingProcessCloneName.vi: Updated to perform case-insensitive matching forProcess.vinamesWaitOnProcessSync.vi: Modified to useGetCallingProcessCloneName.vifor consistent process name resolution, ensuring the same matching algorithm is applied during both registration and synchronization