LVOOP invalid scope visual aid

[Intaris]

When working with LVOOP we can define private and protected methods which can only be called under certain conditions.

Currently LV does not offer a visual indication as to which code is invalid in the current context.

A Picture from this thread shows code which is broken (Casea A and B) but it's not clear from the BD that anything is broken at all.  No broken wires, no grayed out icons.  OK, the run arrow is broken, but the code looks otherwise quite healthy.  I would like to see either a red X over the inappropriate methods, broken wires or grayed out icons for invalid LVOOP methods.

Shane.

Message Edited by Laura F. on 05-28-2010 04:13 PM

[JackDunaway]

Ummm.... you're link is not accessible by the masses. It would be a good idea to ask the moderator to remove the link.

[Jim_Kring]

(+1) I've been thinking the same thing -- we need such a feature.

[Intaris]

@Jack,

Good catch.  Slipped up there, but still, anyone with access to the Beta can check it out and the image doesn't give anything away.  I've notified the Moderator anyway.

[AristosQueue (NI)]

I kudos'd the idea, but I want to stress: This idea is not limited to LVOOP. It affects all subroutine calls with invalid scope -- use of private typedefs/XControls, state charts, global variables, private subVIs in .lvlib files, etc. Access scope is a feature of all library types, not just .lvclass files. Titling this idea with "LVOOP" is a misnomer and I suspect will lower the kudos level of this idea simply because users who do not use LV classes will tend to skim past it, an effect that has been observed on other ideas that are general to LV but tagged as OO specific.

[Intaris]

Well someone make a general Idea suggestion with a broader scope.....

[AristosQueue (NI)]

I asked a moderator to strip "LVOOP" out of the title, leaving all else unchanged.

[Laura F.]

Do you want LVOOP removed from the body of the idea as well as the title?

[Intaris]

Sure, why not. 

I would delete my first sentence entirely and add the text from AQs comment "regarding private typedefs/XControls, state charts, global variables, private subVIs in .lvlib files, etc." to the end of my second sentence.