easy way to get error error from U16 to Ring conversation?

[daveTW]

There is a just "Values[]"- property, so you don't need to unbundle the Values from "StringsAndValues[]" in a loop.

[GerdW]

Hi Dave,

---

@daveTW wrote:

There is a just "Values[]"- property, so you don't need to unbundle the Values from "StringsAndValues[]" in a loop.

---

Where exactly do you see this property?

[daveTW]

Hello Gerd,

look:

P.S. This is not reason enough to switch to 2023. Stick to 2019 (I missed 2021, switched directly from 2019 to 2023 - found there some improvements and some bugs)

[GerdW]

Hi Dave,

ok, this came with recent LabVIEW versions.

I'm stuck at LV2021 or older, and use LV2019 most of the time…

[UliB]

---

@GerdW wrote:

Hi Dave,

ok, this came with recent LabVIEW versions.

I'm stuck at LV2021 or older, and use LV2019 most of the time…

---

Well, in LabVIEW2022 Q3 "Values[]" is still a private property.

[Vasilich2004]

LabVIEW 2023 Q1 Prof and LabVIEW 2024 Q1 Prof on my computer don't have Values[] property.

How to get private properties?

[Vasilich2004]

To GerdW

"As your ring is type-defined you surely know all the expected items in the ring at program start…"

Yes, it works as separate VI. I avoid to use such technique. I feel uncomfortable when VI is defined somewhere.

In anyhow, I would prefer if this would be solved internally.

[GerdW]

Hi Vasilich,

---

@Vasilich2004 wrote:

I feel uncomfortable when VI is defined somewhere.

---

Why do you feel uncomfortable when you define your ring (aka item list) in a typedefinition?

This is where the ring items are defined - IMHO no need to feel "uncomfortable"…

I would rather place the definition in some kind of configuration file (INI, XML, JSON, whatever) and read the item list from this file. The ring can be defined at runtime and you can compare user input against the definitions from your configuration data…

[Vasilich2004]

I feel uncomfortable to use such loop which has predefined somewhere entry