Expression node should allow resizing for more inputs to unclutter code diagrams - for more readable and concise diagrams

[jj2]

Expression node should allow addtional inputs by allowing resizing so it can take addtional inputs with predefined input variable names 

Current : single input named x

Proposed: default: single input named x

option to resize to show u,v,w,x,y,z as inputs

 

[AristosQueue (NI)]

> Edit: for the record, x ˆ(1/3) in an Expression Node would result in a broken VI, as the correct syntax is x**(1/3).

Yet another strike against the expression node! It forces its users to remember arcane text syntax. Bah!

🙂 Yeah... there's a reason I went to work for LabVIEW. 🙂

[X.]

I would agree with the usage of ** instead of ^ being unconventional, but that is the same convention as formula nodes, so it's not such a biggie.

However (admittedly further out of topic), the formula evaluation VIs use a different convention, in which xˆ(1/3) is understood as an exponentiation.

[donkdonk]

I use expression nodes a lot for simple things like voltage to pressure conversion (linear equation as in y=ax+b). Nice, small, effective.

As soon it gets more complex than that, an expression node is just fine (but can become tedious when you have to add a lot of inputs and outputs).

No kudos, but not as bad as some suggest

[Darren]

Any idea that has not received any kudos within a year after posting will be automatically declined.