LabVIEW Idea Exchange

About LabVIEW Idea Exchange

Have a LabVIEW Idea?

  1. Browse by label or search in the LabVIEW Idea Exchange to see if your idea has previously been submitted. If your idea exists be sure to vote for the idea by giving it kudos to indicate your approval!
  2. If your idea has not been submitted click Post New Idea to submit a product idea to the LabVIEW Idea Exchange. Be sure to submit a separate post for each idea.
  3. Watch as the community gives your idea kudos and adds their input.
  4. As NI R&D considers the idea, they will change the idea status.
  5. Give kudos to other ideas that you would like to see in a future version of LabVIEW!
Top Kudoed Authors
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Create a proper connector pane when doing Edit -> Create subVI

When creating a subVI from a selection, LabVIEW should do two things:

  1. Use the user's default connector pane pattern instead of selecting one matching the number of inputs and outputs. This will make easier wiring and allow users to add more IO later.
  2. If the user is using a "standard" pattern (e.g. 4-2-2-4), LabVIEW should try placing the error clusters at the bottom corners and objects or references at the top corners.

It should also try to make the FP of the subVI cleaner, but that's another matter.

Active Participant Brian_Powell
Active Participant

A few comments...


* I was the guy who snuck in the change to make connector panes default to 4-2-2-4.  This was right after watching an NIWeek presentation on "10 things I hate about LabVIEW".  I had the code in place by the end of NIWeek, for the next LV release.  Shh, don't tell anybody.


* I forget what release this was, but it must have been one that came out shortly after NIWeek; I remember that it was pretty late in the development process.  Tying this into Create SubVI was too risky, I felt.  Next release, I thought.  There were even calls to remove all my changes until I could also change Create SubVI.  I ignored those requests.  I hope you agree that the 4-2-2-4 connector pane default is a good change, even without Create SubVI using it.


* I moved on to do other things, and never went back and changed Create SubVI.  And nobody else thought it was important enough to implement, either.  And that's where your vote on this topic can help.  I just voted, and I encourage you to vote, too.


* You can change the default connector pane to be any of the patterns if you edit labview.ini.  Adding this to Tools->Options is another idea exchange request that someone has submitted.  Vote for that one, too.

Member ohiofudu israel

My 50cent...Nice idea will make better subvis.

Knight of NI Knight of NI
Knight of NI

The best implementation for this would probably be for the IDE to call a series of plug-in VIs in sequence. This will allow us to add functionality without changing the NI code.


A couple of points for considerations on this implementation:


1. The plugins might need to be called in a specific order (I haven't thought this through), so they might require a UI for setting this up.

2. The plugins should NOT be required to be members of a class. If they are, all user plugins would break with each new release because the class no longer knows them.

Active Participant rex1030
Active Participant

I am all for any improvements to LabView that will make common tasks more intuitive and more streamlined. This is a great idea.


Darrens list of things that could be done automatically is a great start:


  • Change the connector pane pattern (usually to 4x2x2x4)
  • Move terminals around (putting errors in bottom corners, refnums in top corners, etc.)
  • Rearranging the front panel to look nice
  • Renaming controls (i.e. 'error out 2' to 'error in')
  • Wrapping the subVI diagram in an error case
  • Running Clean Up Diagram
  • Editing the VI icon"

- The connector pane change is a no brainer.

- Moving terminals around could easily be automatically done to match common practices.

- For subvis, you could have a front panel cleanup that just puts inputs on the left and outputs on the right, in the order they will be connected to the terminals. This is what I do for subvis because it is quick and clear.

- I dont know why error inputs created are named error out 2, but this is annoying and should be addressed.

- Running diagram cleanup is something I do on smaller subvis, but because it moves stuff around too much i tend to do this selectively rather than just hit the "rearrange my vis" button. I wish block diagram cleanup would just move wires, not vi's, but thats another discussion.

- I dont know about editing the vi icon, but it would be nice if I could define a template that would be automatically applied to the icon. That way its already started for me so i just need to drop a gif and a name.


- I would like to also automatically apply a VI description template where all the inputs and outputs are listed and waiting for a description to be defined for each terminal.


All this stuff is stuff that takes 5-15 minutes of the coder's time every time they drop a subvi. Talk about hours of waste a week. LabView could do it in a blink, automatically. How is that not important enough to implement? Please consider adding this to LabView's next release. Even if its a plugin or something I can install later so I dont have to hear whining from people that dont like it Smiley Happy


Active Participant Laura F.
Active Participant
Status changed to: In Development
Member Rob_Calhoun

I support working on Create SubVI. The current behavior makes me sad every time I use it. It should at least be able to put "error in" and "error out" in the appropriate places with the appropriate names. 


I agree the 4-2-2-4 is the champ in the best all-around terminal pattern department. That should be used unless the there are so many wires that a higher one is needed.

Trusted Enthusiast
Trusted Enthusiast

In support to Michael Aivaliotis contribution, I'd suggest that the Create VI function creates controls that inherit the names of the variables/wire they are fed. It works almost as like that so far (for instance if you connect a control or a wire which has a name, the respective controls will inherit those names).

However, as of LV 2010f2, if you connect a Property Node, the control name will be "Property", not "Control NameSmiley Tongueroperty".

For instance, if you create a VI by dropping a sequence and connecting a bunch of "Value" Property Nodes to that sequence, select the sequence and hit "Create VI", the control names will be "Value", Value 2", "Value 3", etc..., which is obviously meaningless.

I'd rather have those controls named "Name_of_Control_1: Value", "Name_of_Control_2: Value", etc. In fact, in the specific case of the "Value" property, I would suggest to drop the ":Value" and give them names such as "Name_of_Control_1", "Name_of_Control_2", etc..., reserving the "Smiley Tongueroperty" extension to any other properties.

My 2 cts.


Trusted Enthusiast
Trusted Enthusiast

Can't edit the previous post anymore to change the "semicolumn-P" into something that does not turn into an obscene emoticon... But you get the idea.

Active Participant G-Money
Active Participant
Status changed to: In Beta
Available in NI LabVIEW 2011 Beta
Active Participant vt92
Active Participant

I tried this feature 2011 Beta.  Looks good.  Much better!