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.
Allow the Select comparison function to accept an array as its S Select input. This would allow the result of an array comparison to be followed by the Select function and if that array were then wired to one of the Select T or F, would allow each array element to then be replaced individually based on the separate boolean result. One of the Select input (T/F) would be allowed to be a scalar so the array element could be replaced by that one value if desired. This capability would provide an alternative to performing this operation with a For Loop and take up less diagram space.
Topic is discussed here.
If a polymorphic VI performs the same operation on 20 different data types, when browsing your user.lib (or other) palette, you'll have 21 different objects to choose from (unless you customize the palette). That's nonsense: only the main VI should be displayed.
Creating an LLB will solve the "single file" issue, but won't solve the confusion on the palette.
Customizing your palette can be a solution, but in case you're redistributing your VI/LLB, the user must customize it as well.
In the polymorphic VI window, the option "include source code" should be present: by doing so, main VI will become a container for polymorphic instances, and not only a link to them.
To edit polymorphic instances, user should double-click on correnspondent list item.
When compiling a Polymorphic VI with many members, it's kind of awkward to press the "Edit Name" button each time, fill in the values, click OK, select the next member, repeat & rinse.
Why not allow direct text entry into the table shown in the picture instead of having to jump trough some loops?
It would be nice if XControls could maintain arbitrary state information akin to display state but was volatile and so not preserved when the XControl was saved and (importantly) did not set the VI modified flag when it was changed.
An XControl's display state is the natural place to store all state information about the XControl that you might want to access via property or method nodes as well as via user activity on the facade. However, anytime the State Changed ? flag is set in the facade, then container vi is marked as having unsaved changes. This is obviously sensible if the state change is meant to persist - e.g.. control resize, but not if the state change is volatile and can bee discarded after each run.
There are various alternative methods that can currently be employed, but they are not satisfactory:
1) Additional shift registers on the facade - are not available within property or methods
2) Storing volatile state data in LV2 style globals - unfortunately the same global is shared between instances of the XControl. This is still the best solution as the Container refnum can be used to generate a per-instance unique identifier to enable the global to manage the state data for all instances of the XControl.
3) Storing volatile state data in a 1 element queue. There are two problems - firstly some daemon process needs to be able to keep the queue reference alive but this adds complexity in making sure the dameon process shuts down cleanly. Secondly, there is still a problem of ensuring separate data storage between instances of the XControl.
4) Storing volatile state with the data. This works where the data type supports attributes I.e.. variants and waveforms but not for the general case.
5) Storing volatile data in a tag of the container refnum. This requires scripting and private methods and only works in the development environment.
A better solution would be an additional ability type def that is provided for volatile state, presented as a control/indicator pair for properties and methods and prepare to save, wired through on a shift register for the facade and presented as an indicator to init and as a control to uninit.
When using the LabVIEW Internet Toolkit FTP library to transfer large files, there is no way to determine the progress.
I propose a notifier be added to the FTP Registry object data. This notifier would be updated by the low level TCP Read Stream and TCP Write Stream vis and monitored by a UI to display progress of the transfer.
See this NI Forum post...
In LabVIEW 2009, the programmatic API for shared variables and I/O variables was introduced. This allows you to reference a variable by name, rather than dropping a static node on the diagram.
Some of the benefits are: iterating over many variables with looping structures, creating modular code, and dynamically accessing variables based on names in a config file for example.
Programmatic access to single-process shared variables would also be useful.
(Single-process variables are effectively global variables (not network published), but use the same static node as the shared variable and are contained in project libraries.)