Is this a bug? Wire steers around invisible iteration terminal in for loop.

[Quiztus2]

it's 16xwidth or height of any structure you insert into a for-loop. A for-loop of 800 width or height is reasonable to assume for Full HD resolution. This results in >10k pixels I lose for the structure.

[GerdW]

Hi Quiztus,

---

@Quiztus2 wrote:

This results in >10k pixels I lose for the structure.

---

As I wrote before: I place the iterator in the upper right corner, so it occupies the "same" space that already is occupied by the "N" terminal of the FOR loop.

I don't lose any space:

(both options on my "i" usage in a smaller example loop…)

On the OP question: I would qualify this behaviour as "visual bug", but handle it as "very low priority issue".

(I would rather wish for a customizable default position of the iterator terminal, like "lower left", "upper right", "next to N"…)

[ajbradford]

---

@GerdW wrote:

---

@Quiztus2 wrote:

I don't really get the point of an invisible iteration terminal, 

---

Me neither.

Why do you want to hide it at all?

---

• When I don't need that iterator I usually place it in the upper right corner of the FOR loop.
• Or I place it next to the conditional terminal of loops and wire it the to next border (setting tunnel to "last value"), so I can probe the iteration value while debugging…

---

I can see value in leaving it visible for debugging. I tend to hide it if not used because I tend to obsess over minimalism. But I hear obsession isn't healthy...

[Quiztus2]

@Quiztus2 wrote:

I have no access to LabVIEW. Can someone check if one can expand(drag) a case structure over a invisible conditional terminal? One can't do this with the iteration terminal.

Yes, just confirmed on 2025 Q1. Good catch

---

 I remember not being able to expand a case structure over an iteration terminal. Do you see a different behavior on your machine? I am also on 2025 q1

edit: Ok, doesn't seem to be consistent behavior:

 

[aeastet]

I will hide the iteration terminal if I am not using it. It is one less thing I need to look at when I am building code. If I use it, it is on and if not it is off. Some of my team likes this and some do not. What is the point of having it there is you are not using it? I guess it really doesn't matter that much. If someone told me I had to leave it I would. I have been using LabVIEW for over 25 years now and I liked the idea of not having to see this if I wasn't using it. 

[altenbach]

Similarly, the "N" of FOR loops is rarely needed because of autoindexing. It could be hidden by default, but appear if we "mouse" nearby and try to connect something to/from it, then stay visible only once wired.

(This can't be the default, because new users will be confused, but there could be an option of "hide N of FOR loops when not wired")

[Quiztus2]

---

@ajbradford wrote:

---

@Quiztus2 wrote:

I have no access to LabVIEW. Can someone check if one can expand(drag) a case structure over a invisible conditional terminal? One can't do this with the iteration terminal.

---

Yes, just confirmed on 2025 Q1. Good catch

---

 

[ajbradford]

---

@altenbach wrote:

Similarly, the "N" of FOR loops is rarely needed because of autoindexing. It could be hidden by default, but appear if we "mouse" nearby and try to connect something to/from it, then stay visible only once wired.

(This can't be the default, because new users will be confused, but there could be an option of "hide N of FOR loops when not wired")

---

I would really like this option - to hide "N" when not used. Would make it look a little cleaner.