LabVIEW Idea Exchange

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

It would be useful if a "Keep Text Only" (a.k.a. "Paste Values" or "Use Destination Style") option existed when pasting text into control and indicator labels, captions, or values.

 

Example

Screenshot 1: A GUI element (control or indicator) with a custom, non-default label and value (contents) font style.

1 (edited).png

 

 

 

 

 

 

Screenshot 2: The text "Hello World" was copied (Ctrl + C) from Notepad and pasted (Ctrl + V) in the middle of the label. The newly pasted text is inserted using the default font (Application Font, 15 pt, black). There is no option to paste using the destination font style. The developer now has to waste a few seconds reconfiguring the font. The same result is obtained whenever the text is copied from an external (non-LabVIEW) application, regardless of the application (Notepad, Microsoft Word, Excel).

2.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Screenshot 3: The same situation occurs when pasting into a string indicator.

Combined 3 and 4.png

 

 

 

Screenshot 4: In Microsoft Word, it is possible to select the "Keep Text Only" option when pasting text. In the screenshot below, notice how "Hello World" text from the second row obeys the destination style when it is pasted into the first row. A similar functionality exists in Microsoft Excel and is named "Paste Values".

6 (edited).png

 

 

 

 

 

Notes

  • The current behaviour, where the text is pasted using the default font style, can be useful in many (maybe most) situations. I am not asking for the current behaviour to be removed. But it would be useful to have the option to select between the two behaviours.
  • When the text is copied from LabVIEW, the pasted text maintains its source formatting style. This can be useful, but again, it would be useful to be able to select "Keep Text Only" (a.k.a. "Paste Values" or "Use Destination Style").

Thanks!

Open the VI Properties dialog when the Control key is depressed and the VI's icon in the upper right is double-clicked.

 

Right-clicking the icon shows a pop-up menu with VI Properties, Edit Icon..., and Find All Instances. Double clicking it opens the icon editor.

Say you have new errors you want to merge into an existing structure. You have to expand the merge error, then bring the new error to the merge. Here is what I'm proposing.

 

Before.png

Start wiring the new error, then click on the merge error node.

During.png

LabVIEW expands and connects the error wire

After.png

This would also be nice for any expandable node like build array, concatenate strings

BA and Cat.png

 

 

Bonus points idea, but might cause more polarization so don't let the entire idea hinge on this. Clicking on an existing unbroken wire can insert the node.

Bonus.png

The existing UI behavior just wires a new source into an existing wire, which really only breaks the wire. I'm not sure the above behavior would take capabilities away from the user. For build array to work this way, it would have to detect if the singleton was the same type as the array wire you were clicking on. This is a bit more iffy in my mind.

 

I may want to use it 0-5% of the time.

However, I want to scroll through cases in a structure 95% of the time.

 

Making the 5% use case the default (ctrl-scroll) was a bad design choice.

Reverse it before it's ingrained.

 

(ctrl-shift-scroll is frankly awkward and imagine will become painful eventually)

 

 

I would like it if LabVIEW offered the option of creating Block-Diagram-Only VIs. These VIs would be just like regular VIs, but without the Front Panel window.

 

BD-Only VIs would be beneficial because:

  • They would remove the need to spend a few seconds tidying up the Front Panel of every VI. In a large application most VIs do not have a user-facing GUI. Most of the time tidying up the FP is "busywork" that slows down the developer. (The alternative: creating BD code without ever looking at the FP results in the FP being a mess, which is even more undesirable than wasting a few seconds to tidy the FP up.)
  • They would reduce the developer workload, thus making developers faster.
  • They would reduce the surface-area of the codebase.
  • They would replicate functionality that exists in all text-based languages where creating functions or methods does not involve "touching" a GUI.

BD-Only VIs would be my default choice for small, low-level VIs that serve as subVIs deep inside my application. For example, does a VI that takes "a", "b", and "c" as inputs, and outputs "3D Distance = sqrt(a^2 + b^2 + c^2)", really need a GUI (the Front Panel)? Do most class accessor VIs really need a GUI (the Front Panel)?

 

Notes

  • I realise that implementing BD-Only VIs is not trivial. But I believe that the benefits would far outweigh the implementation cost.
  • The Connector Pane functionality would have to be implemented in the Block Diagram. This has already been suggested by CaseyM in a comment to his popular Make the default behavior of opening a VI open ONLY the block diagram idea: "Hell, you could even add the connector pane wiring functionality to the BD - then I'd have even less reason to go to the FP on most VIs."
  • Steen Schmidt has aluded to the need for BD-Only VIs in a comment from 2014 to the popular Allow ONLY the Block Diagram to be opened Without Front Panel idea: "But this idea of Jack's here is about being able to have the BD open only, and leave the FP closed. Not about having VIs without FP at all (that discussion is a totally separate one, which we will have hammered out in due time :-)."
  • I would be happy if, for technical reasons, BD-Only VIs would use a dedicated file extension, for example ".vibd", similar to how malleable VIs use the dedicated file extension ".vim".
  • It would be ideal if BD-only VIs could be converted to regular VIs, and vice-versa. But I would be happy if, for technical reasons, this is not possible or too difficult to implement.

Thanks!

I was almost certain this idea already existed, but I couldn't find it. If it does exist, please cross-link and disable this idea.

 

There are a coupe of functions which could really benefit from backwards propagation of data types. By this, I mean the ability to change a functions input datatypes based on a wired output.

 

Some functions already do this (like Variant to Data). However, that implementation has its flaws (as far as I can tell, the backwards propagation only works if wired to an indicator terminal).

 

Functions like Select, Obtain Queue, and Create User Event would benefit greatly from this (as well as many others).

 

Essentially, what I would like is a Type Specialization Structure that works backwards.

 

To implement this using today's technology, I guess we could create express VIs which have scripting function calls whenever the outputs are wired??? But that's janky and not practical for everyday development.

 

Simple example of SelectSimple example of Select

 

 

Here's a previous idea I posted, for this post, I'm proposing a generalized version of what I suggested there.

Sidenote: here's a plugin I created to make working with Select easier.

Big clusters that go beyond the limit of the FP are annoying, especially to resize them automatically and reorder the controls.

 

Here are a couple of improvements that could be made:

  • "Reorder controls in cluster..."
    • Allow user to scroll while re-ordering the controls to have access to all elements instead of having to do it in multiple time.
    • Shortcuts like Escape and Enter should respectively cancel-exit and validate-exit the reordering phase
      These are pretty standard shortcuts and already widely used within the Labview environment
  • "Autosizing"
    • Autosize to "Compact". Where instead of aligning all element vertically or horizontally only, they would be in the "most compact" (to be defined) possible configuration to simplify the access to all info in the cluster.
      For instance compacted in a square way, sorted by class (Booleans/numerics/strings etc.)
      I understand that this one might be more complex, but it would be really helpful in my opinion
      VinnyAstro_3-1705680190345.png
    • Less important (to me): In Edit Mode, in case a cluster is autosized to "none" and some items are hidden outside for whatever reason, the developer should be notified somehow. For instance the same way than for strings 
      VinnyAstro_1-1705678727875.png
    • (In the same case than above, allowing scroll bars could be interesting in some situations.)

 

-Vincent.

See this github repository for a more complete proposal and an example implementation that gets us closer to achieving this in LabVIEW.

Some languages like Rust and Zig have a feature called Tagged Enums (or Sum Types) that allow you to create a data type that can be one of a few different types where there is a name associated with each type. In LabVIEW, however, Enums are limited to consecutive numeric integer values -- there's no way to associate a type with each named value.

 

The power of combining an Enum with a data type for each value is that we could potentially use a Case Structure as a switch statement with type assertion and data conversion built in! This would allow us to create robust, type-safe code that is easier to maintain and understand.

 

example_equipment_variant.png

See this github repository for a more complete proposal and an example implementation that gets us closer to achieving this in LabVIEW.

Currently the fastest way to open the Properties page of a front panel element (control, indicator, decoration) is right-click >> Properties.

 

Holding down a modifier key (Alt, Ctrl, Shift, or a combination of these) while double-clicking on the front panel element would be quicker.

Combined.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notes

  • Opening the properties page of front panel elements is a common, repetitive task, especially when creating complex UIs where the size, colours, display format, data entry limits need to be changed.
  • Ideally the gesture would work on block diagram terminals too.
  • This idea is very similar to New keyboard shortcut: Alt + double-click to open Properties in Project Explorer. The difference is that this idea addresses opening the Properties page of front panel elements, whereas that idea addresses project items.

Currently the fastest way to insert a Bundle By Name node into an existing cluster wire is to use the QuickDrop Ctrl + I shortcut.

 

Holding down a modifier key (Ctrl, Alt, Shift, or a combination of these) while double-clicking on an existing cluster wire would be even quicker.

Combined.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notes

  • Inserting BBN nodes is a common, repetitive action when working with clusters. For example, when working inside the Message Handling Loop of a DQMH module.
  • The gesture should work for class wires too, but only if access scope rules allow it.
  • This idea is very much related to the "New gesture to create Unbundle By Name node (Ctrl + double-click when creating a cluster wire branch)". The difference is that this idea addresses inserting BBN nodes into existing wires. That idea addresses more easily terminating a new wire branch with a UBN or BBN node.

Thanks

Problem: When developing or inheriting a large code base it is helpful to know which VI has Automatic Error Handling (AEH) enabled and which has it disabled. Currently, the quickest way to get this information is to bring up the VI Properties window (pressing Ctrl + I) and navigate to the Execution page. This is tedious when done on large numbers of VIs.

 

Solution: LabVIEW should display whether AEH is enabled or disabled on the Block Diagram. For example, a grey triangle located in the bottom-right corner of the block diagram window could indicate that AEH is disabled, and an "error green" triangle could indicate that AEH is enabled, as seen in the screenshots below. This display method is just a suggestion - professional UX designers may well find a better method. I would be happy with any indication method that I could at a glance see on the block diagram window.

 

2 Screenshot (AEH off).png

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 Screenshot (AEH on).png

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Idea expansion:

  • Executing a single left click on the triangle (or any other indication method) would toggle the setting to its other value. For example, a single left click on the grey triangle would toggle the AEH to enabled and the triangle would become green.

We need a “modal when called” behavior where the VI is NOT modal when the VI is not currently running (being called). Otherwise, accidentally opening the VI during development while the main VI is running will make it so you can’t interact with any other front panels, block diagrams, or any other LabVIEW windows; and you’re stuck — you have to kill LabVIEW from task manager or cmd.exe (taskkill /f /im LabVIEW.exe)

 

2020-12-11_12-28-19.png

 

My work-around is to add this little snippet of code that uses a Floating behavior in development and a Modal behavior in a built application (EXE).

 

 

2020-12-11_12-34-49.png

I just realized that when creating an interface you cannot create property node folders.

 

You can see from the pictures below that option is missing from interfaces.

 

second.pngfirst.png

 

You can also see from that screenshot that it is possible to have property folders in interfaces and they work just fine. You have to edit the xml to do that, but it works. So it is implemented, it is just removed from the IDE.

 

Now I talked to Darren and he seemed to think the original reasoning was "Well property nodes are for storing things in the class private data and there is no private data with an interface, so you don't need them." I can't really argue with that logic, however, there are times when an existing class uses a property node and you want to create an interface that includes that method. For example you may have multiple instruments that have a VISA ref property. You currently can't create an interface with that "write VISA ref" VI (without editing the xml.) If you create a method with the same name/conn pane and it is not in a property folder, the compiler complains. Now you could just go back and edit the original class and remove the property node and just use a regular method. However then you break every piece of calling code that is using a property node.

 

Here is a use case, which I think is fairly common - it happens to me a lot:


I inherit some code. It is using some particular instrument (Oscope, DMM doesn't matter) They want to support another similar instrument (maybe newer version of the DMM).

 

The instrument code is wrapped in a class. Great. As a first step, I can refactor. I can create an interface that has all the same methods and make the code rely on the interface. If it is a class wrapped in a DQMH module, all I have to do is replace the object in the Shift register with the interface and somewhere set the concrete class in the initialize. It all works exactly the same as before, but now I have an interface.

 

Then I create another class that implements that interface and add some logic to pick which one - some kind of factory. Done. I've made very minimal changes to the existing code and it now supports a different instrument. This is the holy grail of OOP. I create a new class and just inject it and everything works.

 

Not so fast. NI has decided I shouldn't be able to do this if the class uses a property node (oh no!) why? I should be able to have 2 classes that both have the same property. Sure the data's not getting stored in the interface, but what does that matter?

 

It does matter to the compiler. If I want to do what I proposed above and the original developer used property nodes anywhere this doesn't work directly. I have to either do some xml hack on the interface or I have to replace all the property nodes in the calling code with subvi calls and then go edit the class and remove the property folders. Why?

 

It seems like all that is needed is enabling the right click menu, because if you manually edit the xml, it all works. That is already implemented for classes, so I imagine the fix would be rather simple.

Edited Image 1.png

Notes

  • Replacing a node via Right-click >> Replace >> selecting item from palette results in the same outcome as replacing via QuickDrop. This idea should apply to both replacement methods.
  • Replacing a VI via either QuickDrop or right-click behaves correctly. The new VI label is visible only if the old VI's label was visible. In effect, the new VI retains the "Label >> Visible" setting of the VI that was replaced, which is desirable.
  • This idea is somewhat related to the following idea: "Show node names when dropped" option

History probes are a very useful tool in LabVIEW. However, one improvement can be made to them when working with enums. Currently, the values in enum history probes are returned as numbers, as shown in the picture below:

 

Enum History Probe.png

 

It would even be more useful if enum history probes returned values in terms of the enum item names rather than the numeric values associated with them, as shown in the picture below.

 

Enum History Probe.png

Using "Edit Palette Set" is cumbersome and painstaking.

 

Specific use case example:   I create a class library that has an embedded menu file that I want to distribute as a compiled packed library (PPL) or even as a source code distribution for re use by other developers.     To make the mnu available in the functions palette, you have to manually recreate the menu file to link to the versions of the functions inside the distributed functions, which is painstaking for a larger library.

 

It would  really nice if we had the ability to generate or easily edit mnu files.  In the example, a simple search and replace of the paths that the functions in the palette link to would work

The LabVIEW compiler currently appears to use one core of a multi-core processor.  It would be nice if it fully utilized multiple cores to speed building of large projects, and recompilation of VIs when editing/opening source code.

When using the Rearrange Cases window with a Type Specialization Structure, the case list only shows either Declined, Accepted or Ignored. This makes it difficult to know what cases are being reordered. Similar situations occur with a numeric case selector (just a list of numbers) and event cases (dynamic events with the duplicate default wire labels).

 

rearrange-subdiagram.png

This idea is to add the subdiagram label of a case next to each entry in the case list. This would add some context to each item, and make rearranging cases quicker and less error prone.

 

rearrange-subdiagram-labels.png

Alternately (or in addition to the above) would be the ability to preview the contents of the selected case / subdiagram, much like the preview when selecting a dynamic dispatch VI in a class hierarchy. This would be useful for cases with no subdiagram label, or in the case of the type specialization structure, allow visual comparisons of which case should be evaluated in which order.

 

rearrange-subdiagram-labels-preview.png

Many of us using graphical programming for scientific applications, where we dealing with numbers, measurements, etc.

How often we grab to Windows Calculator to compute simple equations?

What about ability to enter something like 3,75*2,8 into any constant or control (in principle everywhere where we can put numbers) and then get computation result in this place:

Screenshot 2024-03-06 09.16.22.png

In the past I've worked in desktop publishing industry and using the software called "Macromedia Freehand MX", and that was really "killer feature", which saves huge amount of time.

 

This is how it works:

resize.gif

Or for example, 5 rotated copies:

rotate.gif

Even in Color mixer simple computations are allowed:

mixer.gif

Everywhere where I can put some numbers, in any dialog:

guides.gif

So, my suggestion to have the same in every numeric control or constant.

 

This is what I mean:

numeric1.gif

So, it should be allowed to enter here something like "3*5" or "42+3*5" 

As MVP suggested to have the only (at least) base operations *, /, +, -, also combined as shown above, but may be "advanced" support (like fully offered by Formula String) is also not so bad, why not:

numeric2.gif

Anyway it should work everywhere, including constants on the Block Diagrams:

numeric3.gif

Also, for example, on Resize Objects Dialog:

Screenshot 2024-03-06 11.20.04.png

Or even in the Settings (in general everywhere for any numeric field across whole LabVIEW):

options.png

 

And also in Run-Time, of course, not only in Development Environment.

 

If you think that "always enabled" feature will be annoying, then I can suggest to make this optionally per Control/Constant Option:

Screenshot 2024-03-06 11.31.54.png

Or may be as global setting in the Options.

As part of everyday class development, I often want to track down everywhere where certain class data is being used. Would be convenient if there was a shortcut for doing this...perhaps something like:

 

_carl_1-1678141878195.png