LabVIEW Idea Exchange

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

Although it might be tricky to implement I would like to suggest the option to add comments to a block diagram while the code is running.

 

This way you can make notes to the block diagram for debugging and/or "reverse engineering" (examining LabVIEW spaghetti for example).

Now LabVIEW is not able to handle .net DLL generic datatypes like lists.

Would be very useful if next generations could handle this.

 

Thanks. 

This isn't a major issue, but it hurts my LabVIEW OCD. Global variables are one pixel too tall and it gets annoying when unbundling a cluster of values into globals.

 

Globoal Vars.png

 

When we try to replace a small function in the function palette its easy... But while trying to replace a VI which is inside some sub palettes and sub palettes its really time taking..

 

So while replacing a VI its good to pin the function palette and select the item for replacing.

 

I hope this has not been posted earlier.

 

 24538iC5BC357EF8C806A8         

 

                  Existing    

       24540iB2819A79BDB1AC92

 

                              Suggested

 

Smiley Wink

Download All

I sometimes want the first result from a tunnel on a loop. I end up using a auto indexing tunnel and then just indexing off the 0th value. Not a huge deal, unless the data type is something huge or I am doing tons of iterations and then I am just wasting memory. I guess I could put in a last value and make it conditional on i=0 but that is extra mess. You would probably want to make the tunnel icon look different so its obvious whats happening. maybe something like

tshurtz_0-1587680626172.png

 

When I start LabIVEW, it will eventually ask me to log into my SCC (I use Perforce) as part of the startup process.  Unfortunatly, LabVIEW requires that I type my password into the Perforce login dialog and then Perforce responds within 60 seconds or this will fail and I will get the following dialog:

 

scc error.jpg 

 

So, if I start LabVIEW and then go off to do some other task and miss the window, I get this error.  If I then open a project, it is not linked to my SCC system and none of the SCC status indicators show up on the project items.  The only way to fix this is to close LabVIEW and reopen it.

 

All I am asking for here is a 'RETRY' button next to the 'OK' button so I can get a second chance at this.  It is a small thing, but it would make my life much happier...  So, please vote for this idea, even if you don't have the same problem. 

Message Edited by Support on 08-10-2009 08:40 AM

We have a software product where we have started working with branches and sometimes have a few different versions of the repository checked out for code implementation / testing / exploration.

 

It happens that I have two (or even more) versions of projects with the same name open at a time from different paths.  Currently I switch to files view and back to check which version I am currently looking at and I just thought it would nbe nice to see the path of the project file int he title bar of the project window.

 

I know I can right.click the project, I know there are other ways to get this information but can't we have a simple indication as to the path at least SOMEWHERE in the project window?

It would be great if Labview had saveable views. I sometimes find myself looking at one part of a block diagram, and then switching back to another part of it to do some work. It would be great if I could just save both views (maybe with shift-F1, shift-F2 etc..) and then recall them (maybe with ctr-F1, ctr-F2 etc..). Sometimes it's annoying to have to keep scrolling through case structures or across my block diagram to get back to the code I want to look at. If I could just find it once, save the view, and then go back to it with a shortcut key combo, it would save me a lot of time.

 

I got this idea from RTS games (specifically Startcraft 2). In that they let you quickly jump to different places of the map with shortcut keys. I find myself wishing Labview had the same functionality. (for an example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKuqC1FpGuU Watch from 1:00 to 1:36 or so.)

 

Thanks!

If you try to build an executable of a VI that only uses a static VI reference to call a subVI - you must either select

 

1. "show FP on call" in the referenced subVI

 

OR

 

2. you must include a property node or reference on the block diagram of the referenced subVI

 

I believe "always including" the subVI in the build spec works as well.

 

Failing to do so apparently results in the builder to NOT include the called vi's front panel with the build, resulting in the subVI failing to function in the executable environment.

 

While that all makes "sense" - it is unintuitive and the workarounds are not ideal.

 

The application builder should look at static VI references when looking at the build and automatically include the referenced VIs in the build.

When you drop a VI on the block diagram it's becomes statically linked to the calling VI. If instead you wanted to call the same VI dynamically (without creating an edit-time dependency by using a Static VI Reference) you'd have to change the code to, instead, open the sub VI's ref by path, create a type specifier and then wire the reference to a Call by Reference node.

 

Why not instead just provide the option to call a given sub VI dynamically by right clicking on the sub VI itself? I'm picturing a right-click menu that has two options:

  • Static Call (default)
  • Dynamic Call

If "Dynamic Call" were selected, all the steps to convert the call to dynamic would be handled would be handled by the IDE/compiler without the developer having to actively modify the block diagram. The IDE has 90% the information to make this happen, right? And the missing information could be provided by an options dialog if necessary (e.g. synchronous vs asynchronous call, run as sub VI vs top-level).

 

There should probably be some sort of visual indicator on the BD that the sub VI is being called statically vs dynamically.

In vi.lib\Utility\file.llb the 'file open+.vi' throws an error when a file can't be opened. It doesn't tell which file it can't open.

 

One of the strenghts of LV is the source string in the error cluster that can be used to include a lot of extra information. For example which file couldn't be opened.

 

The change can be very simple, just add the file into the source string, also see attached file:

beuvink_0-1652104974240.png

This is probably true for some other files here as well.

 

(also checking out these files... would be nice if they are updated to some newer standards... still some very old styling here...)

 

Some background: https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/Looking-for-feedback-on-the-Carya-PDF-toolkit/m-p/4229342#M1228046

 

 

 

 

 

As discussed initially in this thread, I'd suggest that folders in the Project Explorer do not automatically expand to reveal their content when dropping an object in them. It could be a possible behavior, but not the default one, which is VERY annoying. A possible behavior would be that of the Windows Explorer (PC) or Finder (Mac) folders:

- drag and drop an object: it will disappear in the folder

- drag and hold the object over the folder for 1-2 s and the folder will open up. You may or may not drop the object in it. If you don't and move on to another folder or location, the folder should revert to its initial state (closed in this example).

 

Check the thread I refered to above for graphic details (if I may say).

Thanks.

VI Analyzer has a "Error Cluster Wired" check, that does a great job of helping to find instances where you (accidentally) forgot to wire up the error out of a item on your block diagram.

Unfortunately, it only considers "Nodes" on the block diagram, and ignores tunnels through structures.

 

So you get problems like this:

droppedErrorLine.png

Where it won't notify you about not connecting the error tunnels (any flavor of tunnels, only shift registeres shown).

 

I'd like to see VIanalyzer Error Cluster Wired check to include ability to check for error tunnels (inside or outside terminal) in structures wired:

 

CheckTunnels.png

When working on a large project I sometimes want one of my subVIs from some where else within the same project.

I then have to either find it in the long list of VIs in the Project Explorer window (if I remember the exact name) or navigate through my code to find it and drag it into the location I am currently working.

 

How cool would it be if there were a Current Project subpallet that contained all the VIs being used in the current project (minus the NI VIs).

 

Something like the view in the pallet of the Find window's Select Object:VIs.

 

Find VIs Pallete.png

 

 

I have heard of users getting something like this by putting their project in the user.lib folder.

 

mck

I know you can mix fonts on a string control but I would like to mix fonts
on boolean text.  Example: When the button is false, is says "OFF" in font
25.  When the boolean is true it says "ON 23" with "ON" in font 25 but the
"23" in font 12.

Whenever I download a new toolkit or example, if I don't know where a function block on the palette is located, I have to use the search or fumble through the palettes to find it.  It would be really helpful if there was an option when I right-clicked a function that would pop up the functions palette to show where it is located.

 

Product suggestion.pngProduct suggestion.png

 

I have run into the problem from time to time that I create a new build specification in my project, hit the Build button in the setup dialog just to have the build hang or crash LabVIEW. To add insult to injury when I opened the project file again (sometimes even after recovery) that new build specification was not there since the project was not saved before building.

I have now trained myself to resist the temptation of hitting that Build button. Instead I will exit the dialog, save the project and then start the build via a right click.

 

I would really like to see the project file being saved before the build is executed. 

Hi All,

 

Would it make sense for the "Save All (This Project)" menu option to appear on all VIs that are members of a project?  Obviously it's on the Project Explorer window, but it's not on the VI panel or diagram windows.

 

 

I noticed that I frequently (subconsciously) select "Save All" from a VI's panel or diagram, only to get warnings that another project I have open is read only due to source control.  Sometimes my Project Explorer window is buried under several other windows, and it's nice to be able to quickly save the whole project.

 

If I've missed something obvious or there's a good reason for this feature not to exist, I'm all ears.

 

Thanks,

 

Mr. Jim

 

 

 

suggestion.png

I find myself making a lot of VIPM packages for code re-use.  As we re-use more code we increasingly want to protect the code so that we can more freely share such packages with e.g. sub-contractors/licensed users without sharing the block diagram.  (and the first person to suggest we use VI password protection gets to wear the donkey ears for the rest of the year.)

 

When you remove the block diagram from a VI, you also remove the ability for that VI to recompile which means that it can only run on the same version of LabVIEW and on the same hardware as it was compiled on/for.  This makes it a giant pita if you have code that is used (and works) equvally well on e.g. vxWORKS cRIO and "Windows".  Currently VI's consist of 4 parts (Front panel, block diagram, code and data) and without the block diagram, the code section cannot be recompiled.

 

I wonder, if it would be possible to extend this to either allow the "code" section of the file to be essentially an "array" or at the very least let there be two "code" sections?  -It would tremendously increase the usability of the "remove block diagram" feature if we didn't need to maintain a copy for each hardware platform.

 

I'm not sure how technically possible this would be, but since deployed code (at least to RT) typically gets compiled into (rt)exe's the extra and un-used code section(s) could be stripped during exe build, and the slight performance hit during development/debugging runs that might come from this along with larger VI size seems to me to be a decent trade-off.  

 

So my suggestion is to investigate this and if possible allow some extra choices during the "strip block diagram" from VI process where you get to select an extra "target platform" or two.

 

A much less savy alternative would be to modify the existing tool to automatically pre-fix and output multiple "versions" of the same code distribution, one for each selected target platform. This would at least speed up the process of maintaining and creating all the variations.

Sometimes I like to have the Context Help window viewable to my users so they can hover over FP elements and get some quick pointers on their respective functionalities.  I'd like to be able to control the position and size of the window, and also choose programmatically when it's floating/not floating, so I can have it blend into my user interface more intuatively.  It'd be great to be able to embed it into a subpanel too.