When placing a Diagram Disable structure, enable has 'removed' contents instead of being empty

[LukeASomers]

When placing a diagram disable structure, the 'enabled' side of the structure starts blank, and the wirethroughs are replaced with default values. I have never wanted this behavior. Every time, I want it to:

1) duplicate the disabled side to the enabled side

2) select everything in the enabled side except for the wires.

3) execute the 'remove' function I normally get by 'ctrl-space, ctrl-r' (quick drop, remove)

[AristosQueue (NI)]

Can you post pictures of the before and after that you'd like to see?

[LukeASomers]

Before:

After (disabled side of diagram disable is exactly as would be now)

[Manzolli]

Looks more intuitive for me.

[altenbach]

This will only work if there are matching inputs and output. In the general case there is a near infinite number of possible input/output pairings. How is LabVIEW supposed to know how to pair them up for wiring?

[altenbach]

For example, how should the enabled case look in the following diagram?

[ouadji]

sorry LukeASomers,    but altenbach is right    

[AristosQueue (NI)]

Merely because Altenbach is right in the general case doesn't mean LV couldn't do what it could in the obvious case. "If exactly one tunnel on the left is mapped to exactly one tunnel on the right (mapped => wire passes through nodes and arrives at the far tunnel with the same original data type), then wire them. Otherwise, leave them unwired." What would be the harm in that?

[LukeASomers]

Altenbach, that is A) a rare case and B) would be no worse than what we have now. You're probably not going to want the default outputs, so you're going to have to manually wire it anyway!

How about we add one new twist to it: after adding the diagram disable structure, the enabled side is forward, all of the newly generated wires are selected, and the outputs all have 'default values if unwired' set. Now you're one keystroke away from the current setup.

[altenbach]

This means that sometimes you get a wire and sometimes not, and we would need to check the enabled case anyway to make sure what it did and if we like it. Maybe it should only try to wire more obvious datatypes, such as e.g. references. Anyway, the same idea argiment could be equally applied to case- and sequence structures, which are used significantly more often. I still don't really think it is needed.

[AristosQueue (NI)]

> and we would need to check the enabled case anyway to make sure what it did and if we like it

Yep.

> Anyway, the same idea argiment could be equally applied to case- and sequence

> structures, which are used significantly more often.

Yes on Case, no on Sequence.