In most of the cases, front panel is not use for a subVI, but it always disturbs me be opening too many windows. So, there should be a new kind of VI that only have a block diagram. Terminals could be designated on the block diagram.
We all use clusters and arrays of clusters to represent complex data. With LabVIEW, it is practical to build a cluster to represent the data in memory and shape it to display it on the front panel. Using the same object (control or indicator) to display the data on a graphical user interface and to store the data in memory avoids overloading the memory and simplifies the code.
But most of the time, all the data don't need to be shown on the front panel! Some elements need to be hidden. If we use a probe to check the content of such a data structure for debugging purpose, LabVIEW just shows the control as it is supposed to be displayed on the FP. The hidden elements are not visible!
Here is an example of a probe put on one of my data structure (array of clusters) :
And here is the equivalent representation in a tree view. On the first column, the labels. On the second column, the values.
What is your prefered representation?
PS : Such a tree view representation can "easily" be obtained from a control reference or from an XML string (with the Flatten to XML VI). Nevertheless, the Flatten to XML VI returns an error when it encounters strings with accentuation.
I have noticed that Property Nodes for certain numerics do not properly store Range Properties as the native datatype of the control, but rather stores them as DBLs. I have attached the screenshot to illustrate my point:
Notice the first Numeric's datatype is a DBL, and therefore you see no coercion dots for the Range Properties or the Value Property. The bottom two examples show I32 numerics, which have the proper datatype for the Value Property, but have the wrong DBL datatype for the Range Properties.
I propose that the Range Properties should reflect the datatype of the Numeric, just as the Value Property does!
(This may affect other Property/Invoke Nodes besides Range... please list any other datatype inconsistencies you may find in the comments.)
I'd like to have the ability to save a LabVIEW search (Find), with some commonly used parameters. It might be nice to choose between saving the search globally, or in a project.
Also, I'd like to be able to recall recent search results. Often, my searches are hierarchical: I search for some high-level stuff and then do a more specific search. I don't want to lose my high-level search results, when I drill down and do a more low-level search (for example, the low-level search might be fruitless, so I need to go continue on with the rest of the results from my high-level search).
More function for tdms file.
The tdms files are a very good way to record data on disk, but some usefull function aren't present.
- you don't can delete a channel or a group or a value or a property
Exemple : You add the measurment in the group 'raw data', channel 'volt'.
In the group 'calculate data', you add the channel 'filtered volt'
You change the filetring parameters. You wan't to replace the channel 'filtered volt' with the new data, but you don't can easy replace the old data (channel 'filtered volt')
You must copy all data in a new file without the channel 'filtered volt' befor you can add the new calculation.
- you have only 2 hierarchy (group and channel). More should better ?
exemple : 'acquisition\device name\channel name\acquisition number'
Having a complete API for zip file
Currently it has :
- New zip file
- Add a file to zip file
- Close zip file and add a comment
- unzip the zip file to a folder
This API is not quite complete.
Example of use of ZIP files: In a data streaming application, you want to make an archive of recordings files. The data files average 500 MB Once compressed, they do more substantive than 50MB. You create an interface to assist the user in steps of compression. Once compressed, you want to propose an interface for retrieving compressed recordings.
The ideal is to list the files and clarify some information, such as track number, recording time and a few other indicators related to data.
But to do that, we 'could' use two ways:
- The properties of the zip file.
- An additional file that would read that to see them.
Several problems arise:
- It is not possible to read the commentary added with the close function.
- It is not possible to edit the commentary added with the close function.
- It is not possible to decompress a single file.
In the example, if we unpack all files to read properties, it'll take time and a lot of CPU resources.
It would require full management functions:
- New file
- Close file
- Add a comment
- Read the comment
- Erase the comment
- Add a file
- Delete a file
- List all file (with or without a mask)
- Uncompress a zipped file to disk
- Uncompress a zipped file to memory
- compress and uncompress a string in memory (usefull to optimise the network data flow)
In the ideal case, a zip file should be considered a folder. So we have all classical file functionality to manage it.
It would be nice have the drag-and-drop behavior in some box type decorations that will place a control inside it, just like Clusters. Can have also the same options to organize (AutoSizing: None, Size to Fit, Arrange Horizontally, Arrange Vertically). Nowadays, if we want to to have some graphically grouped controls, basically we have to:
I the proposed way:
If a control needs to be added to the group, nowadays we have to:
In the proposed way it will need only one step:
Another behavior that I find annoying isthe way LabVIEW manage the tabbing order with cluster.
Imagine a front panel with clusters (I thinkthat this is not unusual and that you will have no pain to imagine this). If acontrol embedded in a cluster has the key focus, the TAB key will only give thefocus to controls of this cluster. It is impossible to navigate outside thecluster!
In the following front panel I wouldexpect the following sequence when tabbing: Cluster_1.String_1 -> Cluster_1.String_2-> Cluster_1.String_3 -> Cluster_2.String_1 -> Cluster_2.String_2-> Cluster_2.String_3 -> Cluster_1.String_1 -> …
(According to the cluster tabbing order)
Key navigation is essential when a PC isused in an industrial environment that limits the use of the mouse (rackedsystems on production lines, temporary connection with a laptop to an RT target, etc.).
One lack is the impossibility to associatea simple shortcut key to a Boolean control (CTRL+S for example).
Of course we can catch the key down event in a newcase of an event structure. But, we then have two cases forone action (one for the shortcut key and one for the Boolean value changed),what is not practical.
In addition, since LV 8.0 (I guess!) it is notpossible to underline one letter of a Boolean text to stress the shortcut keyassociated with the control.
From my point of view, this is an essential fonctionnality of any development system.
Populating the Tree Control with items takes very long time. I suggest improving the performance of a tree control. Many other applications have tree controls that are populated in a small amount of time, so it should be possible with LabVIEW.
I know of three ways to populate a tree control. The first is to individually add items using the Add Item invoke method. This method takes a very long time. Adding 15,000 entries took over 180 seconds.
The second way is to use the"Add Multiple Items to End" invoke method. This took over 20 seconds for 15,000 entries.
The third way is to programatically respond to the user expanding an item in the tree and populating only as necessary. I assume that this is fast, but it seems like a lot of work to do every time a tree control is used that could have a lot of items. Maybe LabVIEW could improve performance by using the third approach internally for the programmer.
Currently I am hesitant to use a tree control because of performance. LabVIEW is a great product, and making the tree control perform better would improve LabVIEW even more.
Actualy when we select a cluster Bundle or Unbundle when you hit ctrl-f you get this find dialog:
What I want is to select the text in the cluster and get text Find dialog:
Plus... that should work for Property Node and Invoke Node
When I am searching for occurrences of a particular items in my application, I often run into this issue: The search feature only allows you to search for text or a type of object, but not both. If I need to find a particualr VI Server method call, I can either search for all invoke nodes (which returns WAY too many to sort through) or I can search for the text in the method name, and end up with results that have nothing to do with invoke nodes.
What we need here is the ability to specify multiple search criteria and logical operators to tie them together. So, I could do a search for invoke nodes with the text 'Abort' in their name. This would be a big help in large applications as well as those that use a lot of VI Server or .NET code.
When creating an installer for a built LabVIEW application, it is very difficult (see here) to include an additional 3rd party installer (such as a device driver or application that your built application depends upon). What I'd like to see is a solution that treats 3rd party installers as first class citizens. I'm imagining a new "Additional 3rd Party Installers" page of the Installer build specification properties dialog.
This page might look something like the one in the screenshot below, allowing users to add a folder that contains the 3rd party installer files and define a command that is run inside that folder during the install process.
When LabVIEW builds the installer, it would suck the additional installer folders into the main installer and, after installing your app files and the additional NI installers, it would sequencially extract your additional 3rd party installers into a temp folder and then execute the command line to run. This is a pretty simple scheme that would really simplify the process for end users.
I'm sure I didn't address every issue of this use case, so please, everyone, feel free to add your own ideas. I'd love to hear your comments.
I would like to be able to make static event registrations for an element that is contained within an array. Note: this is not just a registration of an event that happens to the array, but an event that happens to an element in the array.
This can currently be achieved with dynamic event registration, but I would like static event registration for two reasons: less code, and dynamic event registration must occur with a FP showing whereas static event registration never errors (meaning dynamic events can pose a problem for plug-in architectures using SubPanels).
Here's one specific example achieved with the current method of dynamic event registration. I have an array of a cluster that has two elements, but I only want to know when a user clicks on the Boolean.
I want to be able to statically register that same event, which would look something like this (in 8.6.1):
As a bonus, as part of the event data cluster on the left-hand side of the event structure, I would like an I32 array called "Index" that gives the multi-dimensional index of the item clicked.
A chart can be used to display each channel of acquired data on its own separate plot area for comparison with a common time axis. If the number of channels varies in a running program, the number of plot areas should be changed, perhaps by changing the Number of Legend Rows. The number of plots in a stacked chart cannot be changed at run time however. This issue is known to NI but apparently is not an easy fix maybe due to memory allocation issues. I am posting it here in hopes of showing enough interest to get this some attention.
Even though I use the tools selection in the automatic mode, many times I need some specific tool not accessible in the automatic mode or force one like "Position/Size/Select". Sometimes, mostly designing User Interfaces (UI) that takes all screen, we got the Tools Palette blocking access to something. Then we move the Tools Palette until it get in front of something else.
The idea is to have an option to have all buttons in the toolbar. Some programs allows you "dock" just dragging the over the tool bar.
Many times we have plenty of space to have all buttons there, if not, we can have a second row of buttons. That will be nice to add more buttons as we wish.
PS: I added a swap button between the foreground and background colors. The idea is explained in this thread Swap Colors in Tools Palette.