LabVIEW Idea Exchange

Community Browser
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Post an idea

The concept of fluent interfaces using method chaining applied to a LabVIEW block diagram would be awesome!

 

When calling .NET libraries from LabVIEW, block diagrams explode horizontally - the aspect ratio of the diagram can easily push 5:1 or worse (it's 10:1 in the example below). Some Method Chaining syntactical sugar would yield a more space-efficient-and-readable 4:3 to 16:9 or so.

 

Property Chaining is already well-established in LabVIEW - let's get us some Method Chaining!

 

LabVIEW-Idex-Proposed-Fluent-Interface-with-Method-Chaining.png

 

See the first comment for footnotes...

Swagger/OpenAPI  has become the default go to way to document and interact with rest API's.  It would be great that when you publish a LabVIEW webservice it generates the OpenAPI yml or json file (being able to generate both would be great).

 

Also having a right click in the lvproj webservice view that brings you to the swagger page for debugging would be helpful. 

For projects, libraries, and their associated files, if the "Save Version" property is set to an earlier version of LabVIEW, the project and its files are not recompiled to the editor version.  There should be an option on the Mass Compile dialog that allows the "Save Version" property of projects, libraries, and classes to be overridden.

 

smmarlow_0-1745952830273.png

 

 

Currently, the Third-Party Licensing and Activation Toolkit doesn't handle PPLs. This makes creating a plugin, pay-per-component architecture difficult.  Handling licensing and activation of PPLs is needed as part of TPLAT or some other mechanism.

If you have mulitple versions of LabVIEW installed, some of them show up in the "Open With" menu, but regardless of which item you select, the VI will always open in whichever version of LabVIEW was opened most recently.

 

Example: if I opened a legacy VI in LabVIEW 2009, closed that version of LabVIEW completely, and opened another VI using the "Open with" menu and selected LabVIEW 12..., LabVIEW 2009 is relaunched and is unable to open the VI because it should have launched in LabVIEW 2012.

 

 

OpenWith.png

The current workaround is to add all installed versions as options in the "Send to" menu, but this is not nearly as intuitive as using "Open with" would be.

 

I would be helpful if the Python nodes supported Python Virtual Environments. One of the powerful features of Python is able to setup multiple separate environments on a single computer, it would be LabVIEW's Python integration could also leverage this. TestStand already does have this capability, so hopefully it could be quickly/easily leveraged into LabVIEW. 😁

Back in the NI-CAN days, there was a handy development tool which was the usage of two virtual CAN ports, ports CAN256, and CAN257.  If you wrote a frame on one, it would be read on the other, and vise versa.  Other CAN hardware like Vector, and Kvasar support virtual CAN hardware which does something similar, where initial development can be tested before having access to the hardware.

 

This idea is to add virtual hardware support for XNET which supports this same feature.  it has been talked about in a thread here several years ago, but nothing ever came of it.  Adding support for virutal hardware for CAN, LIN, Flex-Ray and any other XNET hardware would be a great development tool, and enable the testing of the expected handshaking of software, with simulated communications.

Is LabVIEW available for Android based systems and other touch interface systems.If not how about using LabVIEW for mobile measurements using these systems.

Codewars - Achieve mastery through coding practice and developer mentorship

 

What language is missing in this list??

wiebeCARYA_0-1662972904604.png

 

Codewars for LabVIEW should be mostly community driven, but NI would have to set it up.

When using LabVIEW in combination with other languages, it would be really nice for LabVIEW to be able to read from and write to the stdout and stderr streams. For example, when writing a dll in C that is to be used by LabVIEW, it would be really nice to be able to see the output and error streams from within LabVIEW. As it stands you have to jump through hoops in another IDE or create a log file or some other workaround if you want to see what might have happened inside the dll to cause it to crash.

For distribution, only package necessary libraries in installer packages built with the project. A lightweight UI, server, or client does not need a full 70MB+ installer that bloats out to a few hundred MB's once installed! A colleague has remarked that the total size of our LabVIEW application+RTE EXCEEDS the entire size of the XPe image running on the embedded computer! This becomes an issue when distributing software upgrades to places in the world without high-speed internet connectivity.

Software development has moved on since a similar idea was declined in 2016

http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Make-LVdiff-and-LVMerge-available-for-all-labview-vers...

I would like to suggest just LVCompare is made available in all versions of LabVIEW.

If LVMerge was also available that would be great, but leaving in just in the Professional version would also work.

As a lone developer I use GIT even on very simple projects to give me the ability to rewind and see what changes I have made. Projects are often put down and picked up weeks later. LVCompare lets me see how far I had got. Its also very useful for picking up debugging that should have been removed. In short Software Version Control just make my life easier.

 

I am happy that LabVIEW supports Python code with the Python Nodes. But it is difficult to debug errors. A console showing the output of the Python Scripts would be handy.

Enthought's Python Integration Toolkit had this function so I guess it shouldn't be a big thing to add?

 

Subversion is one of the most popular SCC systems in use yet currently LabVIEW can only integrate with the help of rather flakey 3rd party plugins. It would be so much easier if LabVIEW included native SubVersion support, allowing full integration with the LabVIEW Project etc.

Add a module to LabVIEW to use it on Android OS or Apple iOS. 

 

People have already been getting smartphones for awhile.  And now in 2011, there are so many manufacturers that make tablets with Android OS or even Windows.  Apple iOS is considered to be the cool thing but Android OS is more open and used by more manufacturers (since only Apple for it's iOS).  Since the Andorid Tablet is so new, yes there are more Apple tablets out there than Android tablets but if it's like the smartphone market, Android OS will overtake the iOS market.  It's just a matter of time. 

 

I don't know whether one is easier to code than another, but if you had the time I think a module for both the Android OS and the Apple iOS would be extremely powerful.  Wouldn't it be great if we could run an instrument from our phones or tablets?!?! 

 

But I would just be careful to make sure the module was robust and not too many key features were missing from the full LabVIEW version.  In the past, we tried the PDA Module and Touch Panel Module for an instrument and it didn't work out.  The module was very buggy and missing a lot of features from LabVIEW that we though were important key ones.  We ended up abandoning the PDA module idea and went with an advantech touch panel computer with Windows XP and just kept writing with regular LabVIEW.

LabVIEW contains a mechanism for storing custom metadata of any type inside of VI files as "tags" (e.g. the path of an Express Source VI's associated config dialog VI) but the methods for manipulating them are marked as private. I think this could be a useful thing to have as an officially-supported feature.

reference case structure.jpg

 

 

I have pondered this and not sure it is possible but it would be nice to allow using case structures to work with vi server references.  It is very tedious to test each type with a cast to more specific and the for each type and check for error (current method or itterating through the class hierarchy).

I know that subclasses pose an issue, I would like to see for the case structure to limit each case to select the highest level (ie g object) and the distince cases are error or any direct class child of the specified parent type class.

 

The Use case I see is for handling itterating through controls from an array of controls (if the control is a boolean do something different than if the reference is to a string control).

Could be very nice for scripting.

 

 

 

 

 

It would be helpful if the LabVIEW Python node natively supported Python dictionaries as LabVIEW Maps. This would make it simpler/easier to support a frequently use Python structure. You can work around but you have to do extra data preparation/formatting in both LabVIEW & Python. It would be nice if the node handled that converting to list of tuples and building the LabVIEW map or vice versa for us.

I would like a control/indicator which supports HTML formatting for display and documentation.  There have been a couple of previous similar requests, here and here, but nothing specific to HTML (although jlocanis has been consistent in his comments on these previous requests asking for HTML formatting).

 

I would envision a control where you enter HTML and can change the display from the HTML to the rendered text easily, similar to the multiple modes available on current text controls.

 

Why HTML and not just more formatting options?

 

  1. Why reinvent the wheel.  HTML has been around for decades and works well.
  2. You can mix fonts, localizations, superscript/subscript, symbols, etc. within HTML, allowing much more flexibility when documenting front panels.
  3. HTML is platform agnostic

As has been said in other requests, extending HTML support to captions, labels, etc. would also be nice, but secondary.

Currently in LabVIEW you can have a top-level palette (Programming, Measurement I/O, etc) automatically populate based on .mnu files existing in the folder structure at <LabVIEW>\menus\Categories\.  However you cannot do this with the sub-palettes such as Arrays, File I/O etc.

 

I propose to allow auto-populating palettes for all LabVIEW palettes so developers can place their own palette within the appropriate LabVIEW palette for their functions.  One example is OpenG and MGI each have a palette of Array functions.  They are currently placed in a top-level OpenG\Array or MGI\Array location.  If we could sync these folders, we could place each of the array palettes under the Programming\Array palettes:

 

palettefolder.png

 

Simply by dropping their corresponding mnu files here:

 

palettefolder.png

 

Thoughts?  Discussion on LAVA that spawned this idea is here.