Centre VI Content

[DhruvAcharya]

Thank you Richard,

Sorry for my ignorance. I have read this thread and in an excitement(I hope every first time user of LV feel the same) , typed my first reply here. I will consider looking in depth next on.

[JÞB]

---

@DhruvAcharya wrote:

Thank you Richard,

Sorry for my ignorance. I have read this thread and in an excitement(I hope every first time user of LV feel the same) , typed my first reply here. I will consider looking in depth next on.

---

And even with the ancient LabVIEW versions that support VISA (very old VISA like whatever shipped with 6.i) You could use "Tools>>Options :Environment- check the box for "Automatically Close VISA Sessions" and VISA sessions will close when the top level VI goes idle.

Welcome to the forums!

[Sam_Sharp]

I don't know about anyone else, but I was recently looking for a way to centre a VI in a subpanel and couldn't find anything. In my particular case I had a little spinning 'loading' indicator VI and wanted to have it centered in the subpanel it was loaded into.

This is the way I did it:

1) Centered my VI's front panel around the origin:

2) Create an event handler for the Pane Size event with the following:

When my VI is inserted into the subpanel or the subpanel/pane resizes (e.g. change window size) - the origin remains in the centre of the pane.

I found this very useful for when you have a resizeable user interface!

[billko]

---

@Sam_Sharp wrote:

I don't know about anyone else, but I was recently looking for a way to centre a VI in a subpanel and couldn't find anything. In my particular case I had a little spinning 'loading' indicator VI and wanted to have it centered in the subpanel it was loaded into.

This is the way I did it:

1) Centered my VI's front panel around the origin:

2) Create an event handler for the Pane Size event with the following:

When my VI is inserted into the subpanel or the subpanel/pane resizes (e.g. change window size) - the origin remains in the centre of the pane.

I found this very useful for when you have a resizeable user interface!

---

Curious why you couldn't do "left minus right" and "top minus bottom" instead so you could avoid negating the answer?

[Sam_Sharp]

Yes, good point - I suppose I had better post this is in the rube goldberg code thread as well 

[billko]

Ehhh... I've done worse.  😉

[crossrulz]

You might also want to try Quotient & Remainder instead of the Divide in order to avoid some of the data coercion.  Or, since it is a divide by 2, use a a Logical Shift (would be less processor intensive if you are really going for any and all performance gains).

[JÞB]

---

@Sam_Sharp wrote:

Yes, good point - I suppose I had better post this is in the rube goldberg code thread as well 

---

I can't think that unnecessarilly flipping two sign bits would quite qualify.  Mr. Goldberg would be very disinterested in the wasted energy

[Yamaeda]

---

@JÞB wrote:

I can't think that unnecessarilly flipping two sign bits would quite qualify.  Mr. Goldberg would be very disinterested in the wasted energy

---

From a performance standpoint i agree, from a fanatic standpoint it's an extra block that's not needed (like when people wire a '0' constant to an Index array). The RGC is less than minor, thus a micro Rube, far from a slap on the wrist.

/Y

[Intaris]

Using the negate is better than simply dividing by minus two....