One button with 3 or more cases

[geneclaude]

where should I connect the conditional terminal in the while loop?

[kbbersch]

You'll need a STOP button that will stop the VI completely.

[geneclaude]

I couldn't make the tunneling into a last value tunnel. Why is that?

[geneclaude]

I removed the quotient-remainder function because when we set the constant to 3 and the elements are incremented (so we have 1,2,3,4), the resulting remainder would be 1,2,0,1 - which only shows the sine and square waveforms.

So here's what I did. 

The only problem is the looping in which, after I click the boolean button 4 times, I would have to click it once more so that the loop would repeat again. This would be satisfactory if I run the VI continuously.

But anyway, thank you for the ideas. I wouldn't be able to generate this program without your guidance ^_^ although I know there are still some flaws.

[GerdW]

Hi geneclaude,

---

I removed the quotient-remainder function because when we set the constant to 3 and the elements are incremented (so we have 1,2,3,4), the resulting remainder would be 1,2,0,1 - which only shows the sine and square waveforms.

---

So why don't you set the quotient to 4 when you need the values 0,1,2,3 as remainder? Quite simple math…

[apok]

the low down and dirty....ex. waveforms remainders: (sine#0,cosine#1,sawtooth#2,square wave#3), sorry about added cosine? 

* edited....

like gerd had said...."So why don't you set the quotient to 4 when you need the values 0,1,2,3 as remainder? Quite simple math…"  

[JÞB]

---

@GerdW wrote:

Hi geneclaude,

---

I removed the quotient-remainder function because when we set the constant to 3 and the elements are incremented (so we have 1,2,3,4), the resulting remainder would be 1,2,0,1 - which only shows the sine and square waveforms.

---

So why don't you set the quotient to 4 when you need the values 0,1,2,3 as remainder? Quite simple math…

---

Or, as I originally suggested DO NOT use a constant.  Create a property node for the Waveforms control read Number of items.

Now when you add or remove items the modulo math doesn't break

[apok]

---

@JÞB wrote:

---

@GerdW wrote:

Hi geneclaude,

---

I removed the quotient-remainder function because when we set the constant to 3 and the elements are incremented (so we have 1,2,3,4), the resulting remainder would be 1,2,0,1 - which only shows the sine and square waveforms.

---

So why don't you set the quotient to 4 when you need the values 0,1,2,3 as remainder? Quite simple math…

---

Or, as I originally suggested DO NOT use a constant.  Create a property node for the Waveforms control read Number of items.

Now when you add or remove items the modulo math doesn't break

---

aaaaaaah, that is what you meant.....maintainable? or scalable? I get confused which term....  

[JÞB]

  maintainable? or scalable? I get confused which term....

There is enough interaction between the two that deliniation is usually not necessary.  Maintainable code is scaleable and vice versa.

For instance:  If you stick that code in a proper design pattern (and what you have is close[ish) the code practically reads itself and changes are easy.

Tease VIA snip:  Vi attached