Sub-VI's in case structure wired from constant do NOT show up in Hiearchy unless the VI with case FP is open

[Ben]

Reported to support under SR# = 926287

No CAR available at this time.

Same with more words.

If a sub-VI is "commented out" (case scructure wired from a constant)

and

it only appears in the application in that one place

and

the FP of the VI that contains that case structures is NOT open

THen the VI does NOT show up in the hiearchy screen.

Here is a view with the FP not open.

Here is a view with the FP open.

This BUG prevents me from  verifying all of the sub-VI's have been loaded from the correct location.

Until this bug is fixed, one of the most powerful aspects of the hiearchy screen can not be used.

Ben

Message Edited by Ben on 02-08-2007 09:09 AM

Message Edited by Ben on 02-08-2007 09:10 AM

Message Edited by Ben on 02-08-2007 09:10 AM

[altenbach]

---

@Ben wrote:

...

(B) This BUG prevents me from  verifying all of the sub-VI's have been loaded from the correct location.

...

---

Interesting. Maybe the VI is NOT loaded into memory under these specific conditions and just gets folded into oblivion? 😉

(That icon of the subVI at the very bottom really confused me for a second. ) 😮

[Ben]

Christian wrote;

"

. Maybe the VI is NOT loaded into memory under these specific conditions and just gets folded into oblivion? 

(That icon of the subVI at the very bottom really confused me for a second. )

"

Yes the VI is not loaded into memory until I open the FP of the caller. I verified this by using "All VI's in memory". This is probably the method being used for the hiearchy and was just fine for LV 7.1 and below.

BUT, the hiearchy screen should show me all of the VI's in my application call hiearchy.

That icon at the bottom was a expediant solution to the question "How can quickly add a "\n" to all of my transmitted strings. Pop-up on the wire and insert.

Ben

[Roy_F]

Workaround: Change the constant to a control. If you don't want the control to be visible, hide it.

Bug? - Because of the constant, we know the VI in question is not being called by the application, so it seems correct that it doesn't show up. If you are really opposed to that behavior, the above workaround should suffice.

Roy

Message Edited by Roy F on 02-08-2007 10:47 AM

[altenbach]

If you open an older VI that has a constant wired to a case structure, the upgrading process replaces the constant with a (hidden?) control explaining why.

• Maybe replacing the constant with a control would be the most appropriate solution.
• What if you would NOT put all code inside the case structure, but e.g. leave a few things, (e.g. the error terminals) outside the case?

[Underflow]

It also does not appear using the "Callee's Names" vi reference property.  It does, however, appear in the View >> Browse Relationships >> This VI's SubVI's menu option that is referenced in the Callee's Names help...

Joe Z.

[Ben]

If this will not be fixed then I suggest a easy to find KB on this issue.

Before I figured what was happening, I thought an old version of a sub-VI had been saved over top of the one I was working on.

Are there any other standard development techniques that will prevent a sub-VI from showing up the hierachy?

Ben

PS: If you ever see me wire a constant to a case selector ever again, please feel free to slap me!

Message Edited by Ben on 02-08-2007 10:53 AM

[Underflow]

Hrm, interesting.  If the sub-sub-vi is missing, none of the higher level vi's come up broken...

Very interesting indeed :).

Joe Z.

[TCPlomp]

I think this is not a bug (sorry Ben),

I've noticed when creating a source distribution with a diagram disable structure, the VIs inside the disabled structure are not included, however when opening the VI LabVIEW will search for them...
That's pretty strange, seeing a search dialog for 1 minute or so, and not finding the VI will cause in a running VI


Ton

[shoneill]

I'd call it a bug indeed.

One can argue about the ability to show the vi icon when it's in a case structure which CANNOT execute, but either way, why should it's appearance in the VI heirarchy change when the FP is open?

It should either be visible (which would be MY personal preference) or invisible, but independent of whether it's FP is open or not.

Shane.