LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

"Remove and Rewire" feature/bug?

Solved!
Go to solution

Yes, I verified that this is fixed in 2015 as well.

Message 101 of 120
(800 Views)

Moved from here where it had no business.

 

 

Not sure we already discussed this one:

 

Screen Shot 2015-04-26 at 14.36.08.png

 

Ctrl-Space Ctrl-R gives this:

 

Screen Shot 2015-04-26 at 14.35.58.png

 

Not sure about the logic? I definitely did not expect it.

0 Kudos
Message 102 of 120
(756 Views)

Further up this thread we agreed that if Remove and Rewire was performed on a function with a single input and a single output, that a pass-through wire would be created, regardless of data types. I believe the logic was that, if you didn't want the pass through wire to be created, you'd press Delete instead.

 

So the behavior you're seeing is intended, per previous discussions.

Message 103 of 120
(748 Views)

I need to refer to that discussion again: what post was it?

I suspect there wasn't any type incompatibility as is obviously the case here.

0 Kudos
Message 104 of 120
(733 Views)

Darin. K's post 6?

Fair enough.

It is called Remove AND Rewire for a reason I guess!

0 Kudos
Message 106 of 120
(716 Views)

Here is a case of CSCR doing something I am a bit disappointed by:

 

Screen Shot 2015-08-19 at 17.31.53.png ===> Screen Shot 2015-08-19 at 17.32.08.png

 

when "of course" I was expecting this:

 

Screen Shot 2015-08-19 at 17.34.03.png

 

Connecting the Boolean wire to the For Loop iteration number doesn't make sense, I agree with that.

However, connecting the single blue wire would seem natural, as it is the only other source.

I agree that if the Select primitive had had more than one source wire, there would have been ambiguity.

 

However, notice this:

 

Screen Shot 2015-08-19 at 17.39.39.png===> Screen Shot 2015-08-19 at 17.39.51.png

 

So what gives?

 

 

 

0 Kudos
Message 107 of 120
(674 Views)

Hi X.

 

I'm not sure what you are asking.  Are you asking if the number of iterations is wired, or why the number of iterations is wired to 1?

0 Kudos
Message 108 of 120
(622 Views)

X. wrote:

 

So what gives? 


The Remove and Rewire algorithm gets incremental improvements with each LabVIEW release. I'm not sure which version you're using, but in LabVIEW 2015, the operations appear to behave as you desire:

 

1.png

2.png

Message 109 of 120
(601 Views)

@Darren wrote:

X. wrote:

 

So what gives? 


The Remove and Rewire algorithm gets incremental improvements with each LabVIEW release. I'm not sure which version you're using, but in LabVIEW 2015, the operations appear to behave as you desire


Cool. One more reason to schedule an upgrade. I tested this in LV 2013 SP1.

0 Kudos
Message 110 of 120
(585 Views)