LabVIEW Idea Exchange

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
P@Anand

Array function - corrections

Status: New

I wonder whether it has been posted before.

 

When creating an Indicator out of Index array, Replace Array subset and Insert into array the indicator are not inline with the output terminal. We cannot call that as a bug, I propose it here so that it may be corrected in future.

 

ArrayFunction-Proper-Indicator-Position.png

 

-----

The best solution is the one you find it by yourself
14 Comments
Jeff-P
NI Employee (retired)

P@Anand wrote:

We cannot call that as a bug, I propose it here so that it may be corrected in future.

 


I disagree that this is not a bug. It is inconsistent with the behavior of other nodes, so I have filed CAR 402566 regarding this.

Darin.K
Trusted Enthusiast

> It is inconsistent with the behavior of other nodes

 

I actually think that it is quite consistent with the behavior of other nodes.  Smiley Wink

Jeff-P
NI Employee (retired)

Well those three nodes are consistently wrong Smiley Wink

 

It is centering on the primitive instead of aligning with the terminal. Compare it with the Close Reference primitive (it was harder than I thought to find another primitive with a single output that is not centered) and you will see that the Close Reference error out will align with the terminal.

 

The expected behavior is that if you create a terminal, it will align with said terminal.

Darin.K
Trusted Enthusiast

The Create Control/Indicator function is a mess, and it just happens to butcher those growable nodes worse than others by going to the center of the node instead of the terminal.

 

Either too much thought, or not enough thought has gone into the Create Control/Indicator method.  And when it gets autogrow involved which then gets Create Space involved, now we are talking about quite the trainwreck.  Following up with the BD cleanup tool is like a meteor striking the wreckage of the train.  Even if I agree its intentions are good, why can't it even avoid overlapping objects when that is its raison d'etre?  Inevitably the control still lands partially on top of a label or other object.

 

I suggested putting the control/indicator on the cursor as my way of saying "Let me do that since there is a 99% chance I will be moving it anyway". 

 

The other way is the less thought solution, just put the control or indicator at a fixed offset from the terminal, if it lands on something, so be it.