Allow dummies in (un)bundle-by-name and in-place structures

[LukeASomers]

I would appreciate having a little bit more room, and perhaps a bit more organization, in my in-place structures and (un)bundle-by-name calls. Rather than separate them into separate calls, it would be nice just to be allowed to insert a dummy entry in the list. This entry would just let you space out the entries that actually do things. You wouldn't be able to wire anything into them.

Maybe the dummies would be blank, or they could have a black '----' as their name.

[LukeASomers]

You would find the dummy at the bottom of the list of cluster elements.

[X.]

If I understand what you are suggesting, what is the problem with this solution (which I suppose is what you call "separate calls")?

I don't think there is any duplication of data. At least there is no buffer allocation indicated.

[LukeASomers]

You've got one of those two output terminals going nowhere, and a branch in a wire where there isn't really a branch.

In a very simple VI, the fake wire branch is tolerable. Having an output terminal that goes nowhere but actually does something? DO NOT WANT.

[X.]

I think you are on to something. If you modify each component within the diagram I show, say like this:

the two indicators are different (as they should). The first one has the "Alternation Period" modified, while the second one has the "Macrotime Bin" modified.

Can you clarify what you are suggesting instead, if the intent is indeed to space out unbundle outputs (or bundle inputs) in an IPE?

Have something looking a bit like what I represented above but in effect doing this?

[X.]

Check this related (not to IPE, but bundle) thread: http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Ability-to-Split-quot-Unbundle-by-Name-quot-into-Two-P...

[LukeASomers]

> Can you clarify what you are suggesting instead, if the intent is indeed to space out unbundle outputs (or bundle inputs) in an IPE? Have something looking a bit like what I represented above but in effect doing this?

I mean it would be just like a single IPE access with two things in it, except that there's a blank spot in the IPE access between them. Like, imagine there was some other element to the cluster, called "", and you put that in the list of things to access, and it didn't cause an error not to wire up anything to that entry on the output end.

[X.]

Like this?

[LukeASomers]

Basically. Style could be adjusted, of course.

[X.]

I'd say tough sale, since it is a completely new graphical object/behavior and does not fundamentally change real estate.

[LukeASomers]

The better solution - which I named in the beginning and every other time, would NOT involve a completely new graphical object, and barely any new behavior. Simply have a blank white box left in place, that you can pull down with the arrow and change like any other cluster access. No need to make two boxes with some weird way of moving them around.

LIke this, only pretend the . weren't there.

The only new behaviors are:

you can select this blank entry out of the list of available elements, and

it's illegal to wire to it, instead of being illegal not to wire to it.