LabVIEW Idea Exchange

Suggest adding functionality to the event structure when handling Value Change events, so that the user can tell whether the source of that generated event was via a write to a Val(Sgnl) property node, or via a Front Panel change made by the user. 

This could potentially be achieved (albeit with backwards compatibility considerations) by defining an appropriate enum constant for the eventsource.ctl which available in the "Source" field of the Event Data Node (currently has "LabVIEW UI, ActiveX, User Event, and Other <>..." as the only defined constants).

More discussion and rationale is in this community topic:

Solved: Re: UI-Triggered Event vs. Value (Signaling) Event? - NI Community

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.

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 Wire Multiple Objects Together QuickDrop tool (Ctrl + W) is extremely useful. However, at the moment it has the following limitation.

The other day I found myself writing code like the following.

Naturally I tried using the QuickDrop Ctrl + W tool. However, it produced the result seen below, which is not what I wanted.

The Ctrl + W tool wires each source wire to a compatible (coerceable) destination. In the example above it wires to I32 and DBL destinations indiscriminately.

The desired outcome would be achieved if the tool preferred wiring to destinations that match the source data type exactly, before considering other compatible (coercible) destinations. In the example above, the tool should prefer the DBL destinations. It should wire to the DBL destinations first, before considering I32 destinations.

Notes

• The example above shows 10 wires being wired between the Index Array node and the Replace Array Subset node. The real-world VIs I was programming the other day required wiring multiple pairs of Index Array and Replace Array Subset nodes, some with as many as 30 wires between them. Wiring them manually was a tedious and time-consuming operation.
• This idea is somewhat related to the following idea: Improvement to the QuickDrop Ctrl+W tool: Wire constant to multiple destinations

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.

It would be really nice if you were able to resize properties dialog boxes for controls, indicators, constants, and other nodes on a front panel or block diagram. Sometimes the information entered in a dialog is larger than the allotted space. Fortunately, in those situations, there is usually a tip strip that shows all of the information rather than just the visible portion of the information, such as shown in the enum properties dialog box picture below. To make all information visible, it would be great if properties dialog box windows were resizable and the contents of the tab control pages automatically scaled with the size of the dialog. It would also be nice if pages containing objects with columns (e.g. multi-column listboxes, etc.) allowed the columns to be resized as depicted in the picture below. 

Problem: Currently, the native nodes and VIs that can be used for error manipulation are located in the Dialog & User Interface palette. While manipulating errors can mean generating dialogues, and can influence the User Interface/User Experience, error manipulation is a broader and stand-alone topic.

Solution: Nodes and VIs that are relevant to error handling/error manipulation should be given their own subpalette inside the Programming palette. The new subpalette could be named "Error Handling", "Error Manipulation" or "Errors".

Hi all,

image processing is not anymore the "tough stuff"/"niche" of the past. Videos are everywhere now, maybe even more than sounds. So functions that handle video should be included in the cross-platform standard labview, at least for the essential functions (reading/writing files with a minimal set of codecs, acquisition of frames through ip or usb for common protocols, conversion between image format for display and processable data). This would attract a lot of young users. It would also jumpstart future developments of labview in the direction of AI.

Thx