Sorry for the delay, I got sick the night I posted this and completely forgot about it, got back to work today.
Thank you all for your help, I handed out kudos, do I need to mark a response as a solution, or will it be fine to leave it as is since this is more of a general question?
@dsb@NI wrote:
This is an atypical pattern; I would expect you to write to the local before the sweep and write to the indicator after the while loop, but you do you.
I hadn’t really noticed, but I makes more sense to do it that way, thank you. I was going based off of labview’s state machine example and probably didn’t pay enough attention to the difference at the time.
@Yamaeda wrote:
Sometimes it be like that. You can remove the 1st unbundle, the Unbundle by name can point to sub elements directly. (Same for the bundle at the end, you can point to full clusters, sub elements and whatnot)
You can remove 1 inner for loop by combining them, if you feel that makes it easier to read. Just multiply Cycles and Steps and use a Modulo to extract Current step and cycle.
Those bundle tricks are huge for me, thank you! As for combining the loops, I’ll give that a try.
@altenbach wrote:
I still believe that the feedback node got auto-inserted and that option should be off by default.
You’d be correct, I had constructed the loops and case before I was entirely sure how I’d connect the two.
@Yamaeda wrote:
I'm not so sure OP realised the output from the Feedback will be 1 behind.
I suspected that would be the case, but didn’t know, so thank you for confirming my suspicion.
