Property Node returns incomplete data for Callers' Names and Callees' Names

[Stan West]

I've discovered that, for some of my VIs, the data returned by the Property Node for callers' and callees' names is incorrect. I've attached some example files:

• Call Test.vi: Temporarily opens references to two parent VIs and one child VI and reports the parents' callees and the child's callers.
• SubVI.vi: A child VI containing only a VISA resource control.
  
• Valid Call.vi: Calls SubVI.vi.
• Broken Call.vi: Calls SubVI.vi.

When I run "Call Test" with "Valid Call" and "Broken Call" as the callers and "SubVI" as the callee, "SubVI" is listed in the callees for "Valid Call", but the callee list for "Broken Call" is empty. The caller list for "SubVI" includes only "Valid Call".

To make another broken caller, make a new VI, then either drag the "SubVI" icon to its block diagram or right-click in its block diagram and use "Select a VI..." to place it, then save it. One way to convert a broken caller to a valid caller is to go to its block diagram, right-click on "SubVI.vi" and enable database access, save the caller, right-click again and disable database access, and save the caller again. Although I use the phrases "broken caller" and "valid caller", I suspect that the problem lies at least partially with SubVI.

SubVI was originally a larger VI in version 6.1. I converted it to 8.0 and only later noticed this behavior. I've deleted everything except the remaining VISA control, and this behavior persists. I have many VIs that display this problem, but I haven't yet intentionally and methodically created such a VI.

I would appreciate any insights or fixes. Thank you.

[Ben]

Some things changed in LV 8.

See this thread on the LAVA forum for a lot of words from Kennon.

http://forums.lavag.org/index.php?showtopic=2165&hl=

I hope that thread helps!

Ben

[Stan West]

Thank you for the reply, Ben. It's not clear to me that this problem is related to application instances, because the property nodes return the same data regardless of whether I use "Open Application Reference" or "Get User Application Reference" in "Call Test" and whether "Valid Call" and "Broken Call" are out of memory, in memory in the main application instance, or in an open project. The VIs appear properly linked together, based on their block diagrams or the hierarchy view, whether they are in the main application instance or a project, but the data returned by the property nodes is still partially incorrect.

[Ben]

Hi Stan,

I have not forgotten about your Q.

I have put off working with LV8 for the most part. I am not sure what is happening in your examples here. There are just oo many questions for me to put together a proper answer to your Q!

I am not sure if I am looking a problems or just some of the differences that were introduced with LV 8.

One of the odd things is that I can still edit VI that have references open. Before LV8 this was not possible. This may be normal with LV8.

The next thing that is weird is the "required input" breaks broken but not the other.

I am going to have to study this a bit more.

Good Q though!

Before this is over we are either going to learn something or ID a bug.

I hope its the former.

Ben

[Ben]

Hi Stan,

While I am thinking about this I would like to invite you to post this question to the LAVA forum

http://forums.lavag.org/index.php?showforum=60

Some the greatest LV development minds prowl that forum and they may have an idea what is happening.

NOT giving up,

Ben

[Darren]

Hey guys,

This is in fact a bug in LabVIEW 8.0, first discussed on the LAVA forums here.  CAR 3VJDCQF2 has been filed to LabVIEW R&D regarding this issue.  To summarize, the Callees property does not work properly on broken VIs in LabVIEW 8.0.

-D

[Ben]

Thank you Darren,

I had seen that thread on LAVA but it did not register that I was seeing the same problem here.

Could shed any light on the fact that the VI's once opened were still editable?

In LV 7.1 the used to change to "reserved for run" (I think).

Ben

[Darren]

I don't recall that behavior in LabVIEW 7.x, but maybe I just never noticed it.  If you have some sample VIs that demonstrate the different behavior between LV 7.x and LV 8.0 I'd love to see them.

-D

[Stan West]

Thank you very much, Darren. I searched LAVA for "callers callees caller callee" (without the quotes), which should have found threads with any of those words, but the search seems not to perform as documented.