LabVIEW Idea Exchange

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

I have seen a few posts online indicating a couple of changes here and there for LVMerge and LVDiff.  I think the main problem is that we just want it to work with third party SCM tools like Mercurial / TortoiseHG, SVN / TortoiseSVN, RTC (Rational Team Concert), Surround, ect.  The ability to check in and out from project explorer is not quite cutting it.  With more and more developers using distributed SCC products like GIT or Mercurial the ability to merge and diff becomes really important.  Here is a list of what I would like to see in newer versions of LabVIEW and the LVMerge and LVDiff tools that would give us more time to develop code and less time spent managing software.

 

1. Both LVMerge and LVDiff work ok with a single vi, but not that well when hierarchies are different.  Most SCC applications will only download one file or the files that are different between change sets when merging or differencing change sets.  The basic problem is that in order to diff or merge LabVIEW requires the vi to be loaded which requires loading dependencies.  If the merge and diff tools didn’t require the vi’s dependencies to be loaded into memory then many of the issues just go away.

 

 I understand the technical challenges in order to implement this feature, but I think it would be a far better approach then trying to write a huge amount of code in order to handle multiple SCC tools.  Even if that code was written the workaround solutions are not pretty.  For example you would have to download both change set’s entire hierarchies to disk and then compare them.  How well will that work with very large projects?  Or with a merge where you need three version of the hierarchy?

 

I think the better solution is to just make LabVIEW files act like text files when diff and merges are performed.  The information in the LabVIEW file points to dependencies, and if those dependencies’s attributes change then flag them, but LabVIEW should be able to generate the LabVIEW "file" in a vacuum for differencing and merging.  May require caching more information about dependencies then what is currently saved in the vi, but I think that would allow a better merge / diff utility.

 

2. Support differencing and merging of all LabVIEW file types (projects, xctls, classes, libraries...).  Sometimes the text merge features in some programs don't take into account the complexity of the relationships between LabVIEW files.  It would be nicer to have a visual diff in terms of how LabVIEW treats the file (e.g. how TestStand differences sequence files).

 

3.  This is more of a bug fix, but improve the merge windows.  I have found a couple of situations where the code being merged is not even shown in the three windows (base, theirs, mine) and I cannot scroll to that location in the code to intelligently perform the merge.

 

4. LVMerge exe exits right away before the merge is complete.  TortoiseHG thinks the merge is complete for a file when the exe exits so it blows right past all of the other file merges so only the first file is merged.

 

5. Cover these use cases as differences between change sets when merging and differencing (item 1 solution should cover these):

Setup: use TortoiseHG to difference an entire change set in the repository with the local drive, or merge two change set in the repository.

  • Moved files (not just vi's) in the hierarchy
  • Deleted files in the hierarchy
  • Files added or removed from classes/libraries/projects
  • File 1 changed and dependency File 2 changes it's connector pane connection to work with the changes in file 1
  • Both new change sets add the same file that the base change set does not contain
  • Same as the last item, but added file has a different location on the hard drive between the change sets

There are probably more that I am not thinking of, but that would be a good start.

 

6. Simplify the entire process by providing a real IDE for merging and differencing files.  I am envisioning something with a hierarchy of views like Beyond Compare.  It would allow you to simplify some actions at a high level, but would give you the power to perform advanced actions.  For example, present a list of differences, types of differences, and the types of merges possible. 

  • Maybe some files can be auto-merged
  • SCC thinks the files were different but there are only cosmetic changes
  • User could choose between a deleted file or a changed file
  • Two versions are different but the user knows which one to choose without performing a merge.

The user should be able to have a quick view (no loading dependencies), or double click on the item and a new tab comes up that allows an actual file merge (vi, class, project, ect.).

 

 I think a tool like that that has the ability to interface with third party SCC tools would be a huge timesaver especially when dealing with distributed environments where merges occur more often.  It may need to stream all of the changes from a tool like TortoiseHG before performing a merge (probably easiest implementation), or rewrite the GUI for managing Mercurial or GIT change sets directly.

 

 The other option is to say "just use a check in check out central repository SCC", and I would say Phooeey! to that. Smiley Happy  After using Mercurial with TortoiseHG for a while I would not switch to anything other then another distributed SCC application...even with the difficulties with the merges and differences, using another system still poses similar problems (sometimes even worse) and the software management in those programs just stifles productivity.  Has anyone ever tried to move a class and its members to a different directory after the code has already been checked into an SCC tool like Perforce?  How about managing a multi-branch project where stable release updates are not only applied to the trunk but to a major feature branch?  Painful...

 

I think that these changes to the LabVIEW development environment will move us from “writing LabVIEW code” to “software development using LabVIEW”.

It would be great if Package builds also supported these two arguments as is supported by normal installers Advanced Page (Installer Properties Dialog Box) - NI

 

The value in this, is that you could then store your package feed in a directory that is relative to the package and automate installing the package and adding the feed to NIPM.

 

Currently, as per NI support, there is NO way to do that.

Currently, when you programmatically build an application using the "Build" VI of the App Builder API, you have no feedback (such as build details, progress percentage, warnings, errors...) and no ability to cancel while it builds.

So you have no idea how long it will take to build and cannot cancel if it takes too long.

 

It would be great to have these interactions, just like with the manual build:

raphschru_1-1664575565945.png

 

The Build VI could have 2 notifiers or user events as additional inputs:

- 1 to receive build details, progress percentage, warnings and errors

- 1 to send the Cancel command

 

These additional inputs would be optional and default to invalid refnums, which would mean "do not use the feature".

This is something a few power users have asked me about. There's no Instrument Driver or VIPM Idea Exchange, so I thought I would post it here.


What if VIPM could manage Instrument Drivers from IDNet?
There are a few key benefits this would offer us...

  • download IDNet drivers directly from VIPM 
  • track which version of a driver you are using for different projects and revert when necessary 
  • wrap up ID dependencies in a VIPC file for use at a customer site
Install Other Version.png
Get Info.png 

Hello,

 

I would like to suggest that LabVIEW support HDF5 for data format, file storage and data transfer.   I would to suggest the support include maintenance to coincide with new and future versions of HDF5.

 

Thank you.

DVRs are references, and are automatically released when the VI hierarchy that created and "owns" it goes idle (stops executing).  Commonly, the DVR just contains by-value objects, or LabVIEW references that are also automatically released, but an important use case of DVRs is wrapping a non-labview reference that must be properly cleaned-up.   An example is an SQLite Connection pointer that must have a dll method called on it in order to release the database file it is holding open.  Many dlls have similar pointers/handles that need to be properly closed.  This is a headache for Programmers, who cannot rely on a stopped VI releasing its resources, often requiring restarts of LabVIEW to unload the dll.

 

A clean and easy solution to this problem would be to allow a "DVR Cleanup Callback VI" to be registered with the system when the DVR is created.   That VI would be called if and only if the DVR is release because its calling VI hierarchy goes idle.   This VI would contain the code to cleanup/close the contained non-LabVIEW references.  Could have other uses, such as debugging. 

 

I have developed multiple APIs that wrap non-LabVIEW dlls, and this feature would be a very significant help.   Please consider it.

There are many VIs located beneath the "<LabVIEW>\resource" folder that need to be called as subVIs of LabVIEW add-ons (e.g. project providers need to call provider API VIs located there).  However, because the resource folder is not a Symbolic Path this introduces many challenges for LabVIEW add-on developers.  LabVIEW add-ons that link to VIs beneath the resource folder cannot be moved to a new location (for example as part of a source distribution build step), otherwise they will not be able to find these resource subVIs (since they link via a relative path between the caller and subVI, rather than a relative path between the resource folder and the subVI).  Note that NI doesn't really feel this "pain" since most of the add-ons NI develops are developed "in place" beneath LabVIEW and ship with LabVIEW -- they don't get "built" and they don't get "installed".  However, for 3rd party add-on developers, it's critical that the resource folder be a symbolic path.

 

Note: This would make building packages of project provider plug-ins possible with VIPM.

Recently I've talked to companies that are already using LabVIEW and their organization has standardized on tools such as JIRA for bug tracking/project tracking as part of an organization-wide initiative.  JIRA connects to other IDEs/programming tools such as VisualStudio, Eclipse, IntelliJ, etc.  Atlassian (the company that makes JIRA) also provides tools that can part of a larger Agile process and can facilitate code reviews and other software development processes.

 

JIRA.png

 

The idea up for vote is to offer more comprehensive LabVIEW interoperability with industry standard tools such as JIRA, or other software as part of an internal software design process.  (feel free to specify a certain tool, if you have a preference)

The LabVIEW Task Manager is an outstanding tool for debugging LabVIEW Applications. It should be included in LabVIEW in my opinion.

 

a345fe65cbe713b29f505a851e0fe597.PNG

The current implementation of flattening and unflattening from XML is quite noisy and includes information unnecessary for the users. Rewriting it or including Pretty Print functionality to LabVIEW would greatly simplify loading settings, exchange of data with other languages, dynamic configurations, visualizations of complex systems, network communication etc.

 

PrimaryKey_0-1573820513072.png

For community solution and examples of these features please go to -> https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-APIs-Discussions/Tree-Map/td-p/3972244

 

This could include also Pretty JSON since XML and JSON are interchangeable -> http://www.utilities-online.info/xmltojson/#.Xc6XjVdKiUk

 

Additionally the XML parsing should be implemented without requiring Windows .NET platform components, so it can be done on a real-time system. Current XML parsing functions cannot be called on RT.

 

It is common, in writing reusable code, to handle arbitrary clusters in variants.  To access the elements of the cluster, one wants to convert the cluster into an array of variants containing the individual items.  After access, one needs to convert the array of variants back into the original cluster.

 

There are several examples of packages that use this on NI.com and in the LAVAg.org Code Repository.  They mostly use functions for working with Variant Clusters from OpenG; however, these can be quite slow.   Recent LabVIEW versions have had the ability to do much of the functions quicker, however, there is a very imortant missing native ability: to convert an Array of Variants into a Variant Cluster.

 

The other direction, Cluster to Array of Variants, works like this:

Array of Variants to Cluster.png

But trying to reverse the process breaks:

Array of Variants to Cluster.png

 

So my idea is make the second image work; make an Array of Variants interchangable with a Variant Cluster in the "Variant to Data" LabVIEW primative. The interchangability should apply to contained subclusters/arrays also.  The matching of array to cluster elements can be by cluster order rather than element name.

 

This would greatly aid the performance of reuasable packages that operate on arbitrary clusters.

Although I expect that it will take a while before this is implemented I would like to add the request so NI can start thinking about it.

 

As you might have noticed that Microsoft announced a few things on Microsoft build 2015.

 

Aside from the hololens and windows 10 for the raspberry pi they both share 1 common factor. They both run "Universal apps" (see http://www.engadget.com/2015/01/21/windows-10-makes-microsofts-dream-of-universal-apps-come-true ).

 

So it would be great if we can run LabVIEW programs as a "universal app" and run our code on all windows 10 devices..

As part of a review of a shipping product, I want to make sure that all of our LabVIEW-built executables are using the same version of LabVIEW so that we also only have to ship one version of the LabVIEW Run-Time Engine. Everyone I've talked to has given me advice on things to change at export time, build time, or even run-time to know the version of LabVIEW it was built in (e.g. the App.Version property), but what if I want to know the version of an EXE I have already built?

Here are the methods I've tried so far:
1. I created a set of VIs that does it crudely by reading the EXE file in as if it were a text file, finding mention of lvrt.dll, and then scanning back a few hundred bytes to try and find a version X.Y token in there. (Of course this could be done in any language, not just LV). This solution can be automated for my product release's review process, but it would be prone to failure if the EXE format changes or my assumptions aren't correct. I wrapped the solution in one that searches our installation directories for all EXEs and returns all LV EXEs with versions (as they are detected here) and all non-LV EXEs so I can verify that my tool is not giving false negatives on LabVIEW-based executables.

Parse EXE as text for Version

 

(See attached .zip file for my LV implementation)


2. Run the EXE on a machine with no LV RTE and read the version from the error popup that you get when it launches. Obviously this requires user interaction, and requires launching the executable.
3. Install all LV RTE versions you think the EXE most likely requires. If it launches without incident and stays in memory, you can use Process Explorer to figure out what libraries it has loaded and see which version of LV RTE was called (since the lvrt.dll will be under "<NISHARREDDIR>\LabVIEW Run-Time\<Version>"). Obviously this isn't easily automated either, and requires launching the executable.
4. I tried using Dependency Walker to see what lvrt.dll dependency was found, but it didn't show me anything useful. I'm guessing it's dynamically loaded somehow, and DepWalker can't tell me?

What I'd really like are two things:
1. An LV Invoke Method like "Get VI Version" and "Get VI Editor Version" that works on built applications -- "Get App Version" with the same types of inputs and outputs as (file path input, string version output and U32 version output). An added output to determine platform and/or bitness would be nice, too.

2. An LV RTE property that tells me the Run-Time version in the file's properties. I could potentially automate checking of this via .NET calls or something like that

GetAppVersion.png

 

Embed_LVRTE_Version_into_EXE.png

The detailed help link in the LabVIEW Context Help window is a great way to add extra documentation to your LabVIEW code.  However it currently only supports .hlp, .chm, .htm, and .html files types.  This should support many more documentation types such as pdf, txt, doc, .xls, png, .etc, etc.

 

pdf.png

Firefox is not publishing the PNG data that contains a snippet inside the Drag and Drop info, however the info is stored inside CFSTR_FILEDESCRIPTOR (source) it would be very helpfull if LabVIEW supported this as well.

 

TOn

Support the loading and use of dotnet core libraries.  They are cross platform and could provide functionality for both Windows, Linux and Mac users and there is so much code that we could begin to bring into the ecosystem.  

I've long wished Labview had native support for Interfaces.  Recently I ran across an article describing Traits as a better alternative to Interfaces, Mixins, Multiple Inheritance, etc.  Traits are (as near as I can tell) similar to Interfaces with the main difference being Traits can define a method implementation while Interfaces can only define a signature.

 

I'd like to see Traits implemented in G instead of Interfaces.

 

(Cross posted to LAVA.)

 

 

At the moment you can Register for Events using a Cluster of Refnums.

But you cannot Destroy User Events or Unregister for Events in this way.

 

This approach allows for you to scale your application without the need to change the code that handles Registering Events.

It would be very convenient to be able to close references in this way (using a Cluster of Refnums) too, as per my illustration below:

 

21670iEFD0527198796259

I often need to interpret JSON formated Strings.

Until now I use regular expressions.

 

A JSON-Parser (like the LabVIEW-XML-Parser) should simplify the expense for me drastically.

With the increasing size of the LabVIEW ecosystem, there is a growing number of third party tools written in LabVIEW that are versioned independently from LabVIEW's version number.  For example, I could create an API that has versions 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0, and all three versions could be compatible with LabVIEW 2009 or later.  Tools like VI Package Manager make it easy for content creators to publish multiple versions of an API, and for users to upgrade and downgrade between those versions.  However, this ease of use disappears if significant changes have been made to the VIs in an API, such as:

  • Changing VI connector panes
  • Renaming or moving VIs on disk
  • Adding VIs to a library

If any of the above changes are made to VIs in an API between versions, it can become impossible to migrate code between the two versions without a lot of manual searching, replacing, and relinking.

 

LabVIEW should provide a mechanism to define mappings between old and new versions of third party toolkit VIs.  Consider the case where I make the following changes to a VI from my toolkit:

 

 

Version 1.0

Version 2.0

VI Path

 

<userlib>\mytoolkit\CompRes.vi

<vilib>\mytoolkit\Compute Result.vi

Owning Library

 

none

Mytoolkit.lvlib

Connector Pane

 pane1.png  pane2.png

 

I should be able to create a mapping file included with version 2.0 of the toolkit that describes the changes made between versions 1.0 and 2.0 of the VI.  This way someone could write an application that calls version 1.0 of the VI, then upgrade their toolkit to version 2.0, and the application source code would be able to find, load, and relink version 2.0 of the VI without any hassle.