From Friday, April 19th (11:00 PM CDT) through Saturday, April 20th (2:00 PM CDT), 2024, ni.com will undergo system upgrades that may result in temporary service interruption.

We appreciate your patience as we improve our online experience.

LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Conditional Loop Terminal and Autogrow

When changing a for loop terminal from indexing to conditional, the for loop and any containing structures expand even when they are not set to Auto Grow.

 

When selecting multiple conditional tunnels and and choosing Vertical Compress from the Distribute Objects menu, the tunnels are compressed as if they don't have condititonal terminals.

 

Are either of these bugs known or corrected in LabVIEW 2013?  I could not find anything on NI.com when searching for "conditional tunnel autogrow".

 

Thanks,

 

Matt

Message 1 of 6
(3,048 Views)

Matt,

 

A Very nice example of unexpected behaviour!

 

Steps to reproduce:

 

  • Open Matt's attachment in LabVIEW 2012  (12.0f3 Windows 32 on Win 7 64)
  • Right-click the loop and verify Autogrow is not checked
  • Right-click the top output tunnel and select Tunnel mode>>Conditional.   Loop does not respect the autogrow setting! 
  • Lasso both output tunnels and Ctrl+D (or optionally, click Distribute items>>Vertical Compress)  Conditional glyphs are not respected in allignment
  • Select the "Top" tunnel and Ctrl+Shift+J (Move to back)  What kind of tunnel is that now? I'd really hate to debug that one.
  • Really Really hate to debug that one! Run VI Analizer! No overlapping objects!Smiley SurprisedSmiley SurprisedSmiley Surprised

!1.png

 

Sounds like a small oversight-- but a deadly potential for breaking code that is impossible to find without a divining rod!

 

BOLO (Be on the lookout) for this type of bug.

 


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
Message 2 of 6
(3,020 Views)

Thanks for reporting this!

 

I can easily reproduce the autogrow behavior in 2012. I don't see an existing CAR for this, so I will file one.

 

I am not seeing the behavior you report when distributing the items or Control+Shift+J (send to back). Can you please supply screenshots illustrating this?

Joey S.
Senior Product Manager, Software
National Instruments
0 Kudos
Message 3 of 6
(2,971 Views)

I have filed CAR 423949 against the VI Analyzer's Hidden Tunnels test, as it currently does not take the '?' part of a conditional tunnel into account.


Joey, I suggest you file two CARs...one for the growing behavior, and another for the fact that Vertical Compress does not respect the '?' part of a conditional tunnel when compressing objects.

Message 4 of 6
(2,963 Views)

Hi Matt, Jeff, and Darren,

 

I have filed CAR 423935 for the Autogrow issue, "Creating conditional terminal on For Loop causes loop to grow even if Autogrow is disabled", and CAR 423937 for the Vertical Compress issue "Vertical Compress causes For Loop conditional terminals to stack so that tunnel is obscured".

 

Thanks for pointing these out!

Joey S.
Senior Product Manager, Software
National Instruments
Message 5 of 6
(2,943 Views)

Thank you guys!

 

These are not the most egregious bugs... but as a developer, I hate it when a user asks me if I fixed xyz bug but she never told me about the bug!

 

So I make an effort to let you know what I notice, and I appreciate you noticing what I let you know.  🙂

0 Kudos
Message 6 of 6
(2,909 Views)