Please do not create hidden controls/indicators

[tst]

---

@tst wrote:

I would be willing to accept disabling AG if it meant the VI was broken as long as there was still hidden code, and I think I might just actaully suggest that as an idea.

---

The idea can be found here - http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/LabVIEW-should-break-VIs-which-have-hidden-code/idi-p/...

[X.]

It's a different problem: detecting hidden objects (which you could do using the VI Analyzer, BTW).

My contention is with the way new objects are placed. When there is plenty of space, the object should not be hidden.

I guess the algorithm just doesn't check whether autogrow is enabled.

I agree that in a packed diagram, it might not always possible to drop a newly created object nearby, and I would not want it to be dropped miles away from where I right-clicked (not that it has ever prevented NI to put terminals miles away from where the action takes place in the past and present...).

[X.]

Maybe these 3 pictures will make it clear why I think there is a "feature" in the way new indicator/control terminals are placed on the diagram:

 ==== wrong

==== right

You'll notice that in all cases, the terminal is dropped BELOW the wire that was right-clicked. In case 2, that's fine. In case 1, that makes no sense. In case 3, I would concede that to respect the left-to-right data flow, there is SOME logic for the chosen location of the string terminal but it still doesn't make any sense. As far as I am concerned, I am violating this rule all the time, because I do not care about it.

I am simply suggesting that instead of applying the strict rule: "drop the terminal XX pixels BELOW the wire", the rule be changed to: "first look whether there is enough space to the right, then above, then below, and then to the left". If there is no space, well so be it...

My 2 cts.

BTW, here is what MY algorithm would do:

[Ray.R]

Your last post should be in the Ideas forum.. You're gonna get lots of Kudos!

[X.]

I NEVER get a lot of Kudos. And besides, what I want is a CAR!

[Ray.R]

You don't own a CAR??

So you take the bus?  Well, that's good for the environment.  🙂

We're proud of you.  And so is the planet.  🙂

😄

EDIT:  Ya got some Kudos, too!

[BillMe]

Have two!

[X.]

I just discovered this suggestion by Knight Altenbach, which mentions the same problem in the context of autogrow enabled.

I am not concerned since I do not enable autogrow, but basically this is trying to address the same bug in the new terminal placement algorithm.

[X.]

And to finish with this thread, let me point to a suggestion I made which tries to address it in the more general context of diagram insertion of objects.

[JKSH]

---

@rolfk wrote:

The votes [on the Idea Exchange] will show how important other think this to be and if it can garner 200 votes in reasonable time we might actually see something done to this in LabVIEW 2014.

---

It doesn't work that way, unfortunately: http://forums.ni.com/t5/ideas/v2/ideapage/blog-id/labviewideas/article-id/20464/page/2#comments

---

@AristosQueue (NI) wrote:

> Is kudos number not related to level of interest?

No correlation whatsoever.

A) I can post the exact same idea on two different days of the year, one in August and one in December. The one in August will generally get more kudos. Why? Because one is new and fresh during NI Week when everyone is talking about LV and the other is posted while lots of folks are on vacation and by the time they get back it fell off the list.

B) I ask person X "Do you want feature Y?" He says, "Yes." I ask, "Do you want feature Z?" He says, "Yes." I ask, "Do you want feature Y if it means we don't work on feature Z?" He says, "No!"

---