NI TestStand Idea Exchange

Hello all TestStand fans, 

For my recent project i had to modify the frontEnd callback.

=> According to the TestStand help, the only path where this file can be created is in TestStand default path or in the corresponding user path.

.... But no where else !!!! 

It would be nice to be abble to configure the frontEndCallback path in the configure options !

=> Doing so, the path of this callback could be placed everywhere ! (In the configuration path would be nice !)

=> Doing so, it would be possible to create a frontendcallback for each configuration !

I am a TestStand developper, a NI partner, not a TestStand end user.

My work is to provide custom sequencer for my customer.

On my computer i had to manage many different sequencer !

• If file are threated as global ... i had to customize my computer to switch among my different sequencers ! (Or to create virtual PC's : Virtual box / VmWare ... ) 

• If all TestStand configuration files where identified in the "Configuration directory", my only work to switch from 1 project to an other would be to point on a different Configuration path ! 

I think that if it is impossible to do so, today, is because this callback is loaded before the "Station configuration" is loaded ?  

My ideas should be applyed to all global files ...

• Station callbacks
• Localization file
• ... i dont't know the behaviour of all files !

• Please get rid off all "Global files" ! 
• Replace them by files, with path configuration in the "Station options" ... and located in the "Configuration path" 

Doing so, will also simplify the deployement process !!!! 

=> A single path copy ... is quite easyer as a complicate deployment process ! 

Thanks for your help.

Manu.net

When setting arrays, even multi-dimensional arrays, it is possible to initialize them in single assignment expression. For example, "Locals.Array = {1, 2, 3}" will re-define Locals.Array as a 1D array with elements "1", "2", and "3". This is essentially the same as C-style initialization syntax, which also supports structs.

It would be helpful if containers could be assigned in a similar manner. For example, the illustrated container:

could be assigned completely using "Locals.Container = {True, 1, "foo"}".

Currently, that syntax generates a run-time error, "Expected Container, found Array of Containers".

The only scenario I could think of where assignment gets a little weird is with Object types, but in that case you'll have to be assigning Nothing, the return of a function call, or an existing object from another property - there's no way to define a literal value to assign there, but that's already the inherent nature of Object types.

My use case is often container initialization. There are several kludges around this - keeping an empty copy of the container and assigning it to the working copy to clear the working copy, individually listing out each parameter, and a few others. Another case is when it's useful to assign a constant to module parameter - it's debatable that may be bad form, but would still dramatically improves the ease of skimming parameters if it were implemented. It would be a slight bonus to Sequence adapter in particular, which cannot expand containers in the parameter list, as other adapter types can (go kudos Allow Sequence Adapter to expand containers in the module tab to fix that!).