LabVIEW Idea Exchange

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

 

                                            "Build Path" should be Growable

 

                              something like this,

 

 

toto.png

It would be nice to get 64bit references. The old 32bit references are build up from two main parts: the descriptor represented on 12bits and the address represented on 20bits. If the application requires more than the available 1048576 references the labview generates an error because the memory is full. The workaround is to close references found in the memory. If an application requires serialization, this rule should be kept in mind. If the application serializes references by an input data, the input data should be limited, which means that really big data can't be handled although the machine have enough memory to handle them. Unfortunately, this feature in the labview has been not changed in the last 30 years although 64bit processor architectures are used world-wide and the 64bit labview plays a bigger role every year.
I think, the main reason is the backward compatibility...but is it possible to provide 64bit references which could be chosen by the developer itself, where the descriptor field will not be changed but additional 32bits are available for addressing? e.g. new option in the labview settings "use 64bit references" or selection (polymorphic) from all native components which could be create a reference. If the feature is supported by (environment) settings, then the compiler uses it generic. If the feature is supported component level, then the references should be checked for conflicts. At the end the architect/developer/application is no more limited inside in the labview because the available 4503599627370496 addresses are more than enough for a long time again.

If I'm working with a class in my development code base, and I right-click on it (or one of its wires), I have access to the full menu of class methods. This is super convenient, and it saves me from navigating the project tree or remembering the exact method name when using quick drop.

 

However....if my class is defined in a PPL, this menu simply doesn't exists.  I'm not sure if this is a bug or a feature request, but, I would really like to have access to this menu when working with classes in PPLs.

 

Untitled.jpg

Check out this nice readable diagram:

labels.png

Whoa there pardner, not so fast. The control reference labeled "Numeric 1" is actually linked to the "Numeric 3" control. And the property node labeled "Numeric 2" is actually linked to the "Numeric 1" control. Etc., etc.

 

I see no reason to change the labels of Control References and Implicit Property/Invoke Nodes. If you need to document them beyond their label, attach a free label to them. We don't allow changing the labels of subVIs, so the precedent has been set. For the sake of diagram readability, we shouldn't allow changing labels of these objects either. 

Once in a while I complain about font issues in general (here, here, or here), but one of the really weird things are the font sizes as used in LabVIEW.

 

The font dialog lists them as units of pt, but for some reason they are quite different in size from the same sizes in any other applications (browser, word, etc.). LabVIEW also shows other problems, for example tahoma 14, 15 all look exactly the same... why??

 

Here is a side-by-side comparison of a wordpad document and a LabVIEW panel. Each line is configured for the indicated font size.

 

As you can easily see, LabVIEW is the exception. Any other applications I tried agrees with the left panel.

 

Idea -->LabVIEW should also standardize here!

 

 

 

Bug replication steps:

  • Ensure that the "Connector pane terminals default to Required" option is ticked (found in Tools >> Options >> Front Panel).
  • Connect an indicator to a VI's connector pane.
  • Right-click the indicator and select "Change to Control".
  • The indicator changes to a control, but the connector pane terminal is Recommended. It should be Required (should obey the environment setting).

Notes

  • Mis-connecting an indicator to the connector pane while believing it is a control can occur moderately frequently, especially when working with front panel elements that do not look very different when they are controls vs. indicators, for example: variants, objects, typedef clusters, system-style strings or paths.

1 (edited).png

There are times when I leave a VI with modal properties open and then I run the main application that also calls this VI if opened in the development environment. This locks all running windows due to the modal VI. I propose a button in the taskbar that aborts all running VIs OR perhaps a list is opened on right-click of all running VIs 🙂

 

abort_all_running_vi.png

 

 

A number of people, myself included, have found it necessary to parse ISO-8601 time strings into time values. The ISO standard has a lot of options, so a complete solution is pretty time-consuming. It would be nice if the string parsing functions in LabVIEW included a format specifier that allowed parsing of ISO-8601 time strings directly.

Problem: Many native VIs use the Non-reentrant execution reentrancy setting.

 

Solution: The vast majority of native VIs should use the Preallocated clone reentrancy setting.

  • The native VIs that need to use Non-reentrant or Shared clone are few and far between - they should be identified on a case-by-case basis. Their Context Help and/or Detailed Help should explain why they need to be set to Non-reentrant or Shared clone.

The following is a selection of vi.lib VIs that should use Preallocated clone. This selection is meant to serve as a starting point and is not comprehensive.

 

1.png

2.png

3.png

 

Notes:

  • This idea is related to: The reentrancy of new VIs should be "Preallocated clone" . They both argue in favour of using the Preallocated clone setting more.
  • A significant number of native VIs are already configured to use Preallocated clone, which is great.
  • There are curious cases where closely related VIs are set to different reentrancy settings. For example, Color to RGB.vi is rightly using Preallocated clone, while RGB to Color.vi is Non-reentrant. Similarly, Trim Whitespace.vi is rightly Preallocated clone, while Normalize End Of Line.vi - which lives next to it on the String palette - is Non-reentrant.
    • This suggest that the reentrancy setting of some native VIs was chosen haphazardly. This needs to be rectified.
  • The fact that so many native VIs are non-reentrant partly defeats LabVIEW's remarkable ability to create parallel code easily. Loops that are supposed to be parallel and independent are in fact dependent on each other when they use multiple instances of these non-reentrant native VIs. When an application uses multiple instances of these native VIs it is as if there are "hidden semaphores" that are added between the various call locations that call these native VIs. This leads to less performant applications (more CPU cycles, longer execution time, larger EXE compiled code size).

The QControl Toolkit is a fantastic library of tools for developing reusable UI components. I think they are a great alternative to XControls. Not only does the QControl Toolkit provide me the framework for developing my own QControls, but it also ships with some fully functional QControls, my favorite probably being the tree with checkboxes.

 

I think QControls are useful enough for all LabVIEW users that they should be part of the LabVIEW core product instead of an add-on toolkit.

Hi all,

I' normally using one or multipe queued message handler with a clustered enum (which is saved as Type Def.) and a variant as a basic architecture of my programs. This makes sense and it is relatively easy to search forward and check a program step by step. Unfortunately, it is not so easy to go stepwise back in the program for debugging., especially if there are multiple callers of a function.
Therefore I wish I have a function, where I can search for a single item of this enum Type Def.
I know that there is a possibility to search a text and of course it will find these items, but is also finds all other kind of things labeled the same.

I had a small chat with a engineer of NI already and we had an idea to gerneralize this a little to give it more use cases. 
In the current situation, we can search for a:
- Type Def. , but then it will find each item of the enum OR
- text, but then it will find all items labeled with this text.

So here is our idea:
Create a possibility in the search window to combine these 2 search formats with a boolean operator, in our special case, this would be AND. But in other cases it might be also useful to have some other operators.

You are welcome to share any thoughts about it. 

Best Regards, Patrick

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 don't use conditional disable structures very often...but when I do, I've always found it a bit annoying that I need to pull up the documentation in order to check what the available options are, and expected string formatting. For symbols with a defined list, why not expose these options through drop-downs?

 

_carl_0-1634052992681.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.

Preamble:

Just following up on a sub-idea raised within this recent idea from tst: LabVIEW should break VIs which have hidden code.  I *almost* like tst's idea, but IMO it is a bit too heavy-handed:

  • YES, I want better information when there is hidden code on my diagram, but...
  • NO, I don't want my code to break!

 

The Idea:

If a structure hides code beyound it's boundary, then provide a visual indication. For example, the edge of the structure could be coloured red to alert the user that something unexpected is going on.

hiddenCode.png 

It would be nice to have a performant way to execute an abstract represented VI.

There are currently two generic ways to execute a VI by reference:

- abstract represented but not performant (FP required, running in UI threading)

- specific represented and performant

Executing a VI currently.png

Is it possible to provide such a functionality which combines the advantages of both solutions like this?

Executing a VI proposed.png

This means, the target VI could be handled in abstract way without coupling to the specific VI connector panel.

I understand that empty interface boxes should reflect their purpose, but this design decision wastes too much block diagram space. When using interfaces, explicit type casting is often necessary by definition. Unfortunately, this quickly clutters the block diagram.

Quiztus2_0-1747037507652.png

 

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

 

 

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