Change Equal Function to Configurable

[kosist90]

The idea is to change Equal? function in a way, that it will be configurable, and will have one input as function "Equal To 0?". Sometimes you need to evaluate number of loops execution in While Loop (or not just it), and when you put standard Equal? function, some of wires will be not aligned in a straight line (either which is connected to Index output, or which is connected to Loop Condition), and you need to move up/down one of terminals.

So, you can see it from the attached picture.

[Intaris]

No.

Information hiding like this is a terrible idea.

There are several ideas to achieve the exact opposite of this.  If I could vote with negative Kudos, I'd give this one.

[kosist90]

Thanks, Intaris - negative Kudos is not bad idea, indeed.

[RavensFan]

That sounds like you want an Express VI.

Wait, that is an Express VI!  It is called "Comparison". 

[kosist90]

With all my respect, but you didn't get point fully. Comparison VI is even bigger than standard Equal? function. Block diagram will be more uglier.

[RavensFan]

Your title is "Change Comparison Function to Configurable".  That is what the Express VI function does.  The idea of bigger/smaller and "uglier" is a rather small sidepoint in the body of your message.

You know you can get rid of that bending by shifting the stop terminal of the loop up by a a few pixels.

By the way, you can right click the Express VI and pick "View as Icon" and now the Express VI is smaller.

[altenbach]

Definitely a big NO to that!

Hiding functionality like that make debugging very hard (that's why advanced users usually don't use express VIs and dynamic data), besides, you can right-click your comparison express VI and use "show as icon" if you want a smaller version. Also remember that you can always make your own subVI. If you design the icon and connector right, it can be very, very small!

In your use case, the number of WHILE loop iterations is fixed and known from the beginning, thus you would use a FOR loop anyway. Not only would it eliminate the comparison completely, even the conditional terminal and all current wires would disappear. NOW you have clean code!

[kosist90]

Come on, don't tell about For Loop - in my case it was just an example of fixed number of iteration. And if I put there logical OR function to stop the loop either button was pressed (which is not there, of course, as you can see - but it could be there) and or number of iteration was reached?

With all my respect - the last 3 sentences were useless, really. The first part I accept - yes, I can create subVI, add it to pallete, etc. But again - do you think, that when I was writing about that Express VI is big, I didn't use "show as icon"? Kids in kindergartens know about it, that each Express VI can be shown like icon.

[RavensFan]

So you are saying on you want a small version of an Express VI, but you don't want an express VI, even one that is set to show as icon?

That express VI's are intended for kids in kindergarten, but you still want something that hides code from the programmer?

It might sound like we are being negative here.  And we are.  You are asking for something that already exists, but you don't want to use that because it isn't exactly what you want it to be.

I don't want NI wasting time making a new variation of an express VI, which any experienced LabVIEW programmers avoid, just because you think the current Express VI is too big, and don't want it to look like a cartoon intended for new LabVIEW programmers (which is exactly what an Express VI is meant to be.)

Don't create an idea for a configurable comparison that is like an express VI, but you don't want an express VI because it is too big.  Ask for a redesign of the appearance of the current Express VI.

[altenbach]

> With all my respect - the last 3 sentences were useless, really.

Well, we don't know your qualifications, all we can do is judge by the idea itself. Somehow it makes little sense, because it is so specific and does not solve anything important. Are you now going to post more ideas of basically the same thing, because if we have it for "=", we also should have it for "!=" and all other comparison operations! Also note that these comparison functions are polymorphic, and also e.g. accept strings, booleans, paths, or even complicated clusters. Your idea would only work for integers, a very special case. How about the numeric functions? We have a "+1", shouldn't we also have a "+2", "+3" ad infinitum, configurable via popup? I don't think so!

There is nothing wrong with a little wire kink!

[ToeCutter]

How about a compound equality operator which can be expanded to check any number of inputs are equal? Like the other compound operators, this would have a squared icon, allowing you to place it without a kink.

As to the original idea, I don't like it.