It would be nice if the Step Settings for a Sequence Call step's Module tab would also list the calling sequences comments field and the parameter comments in addition to the prototype information. This would allow sequence calls to easily present information on the expected use of the sequence, along with parameter information (ranges, default options, etc) that would be useful to the developer. I've created a simple mockup of what I'd like to see here:
By adding these features, sequences can contain their own 'help' information which would allow the developer to configure the call without having to leave the step module dialog.
When using the TestStand API, I always find myself switching back and forth between TestStand and the TestStand reference help. While the intellisense function help is usually enough, many times I like seeing the more detailed information in the help. I would really like to have the option of displaying context specific help in a TestStand pane, similar to the context help window in LabVIEW.
This pane could dynamically update to display function information when using expressions, or show general information about the active pane or dialog (for newer users). Much of the linking for the second case is already done, since the F1 key will pull up relevant help for the active pane currently.
Currently, to export properties which are part of an array, such as the limits of a multiple numeric limit test, you have to specify each index of the array separately, like in the first screen shot, or else you get all of the raw XML, which is difficult to interpret and use.
This is both labor intensive and unituitive. . If instead we had the option to export the array with the "?" and have it parse the information out like in picture 1, it would be much simpler to use.
When working with multiple long sequences it would be nice to bookmark locations making it easy to find where you were previously working. The bookmark could be line highlighting or an icon on the left gutter. Bookmarks would be saved with sequence. Multiple colors or icon would be available.
I’m trying to work with the tool Requirement Gateway. I started with some examples which are contained in install packet of this tool. I need to connect Gateway with HTML document and manage coverage with another HTML document. I managed to get from HTML document load the list of requirements to Gateway tool. If I tried to open the particular requirement from Gateway than the HTML document was opened on first page always. I can’t set the Gateway for opening the HTML document on particular place, when is described requirement.
My point of view is make some modification for better connection Gateway tool with internet browser.
The Sequence File Documentation Tool allows you to create documentation in the file formats HTML and text.
It would be nice if it could also create XML based documentation similar to report generation. Selecting a style sheet will ensure that the XML file is presented in a certain way using a browser.
On this Web page under the New Users are links to the various documentation but these links are not very helpful as there just send you to www.ni.com/manuals which cover every manual for every NI product. You are actually quicker doing a basic search for TestStand manuals than using these links. What should happen is you should be directed to the relevant document. ie for the TestStand Reference manual 2010 you would be directed here.
When putting values into an array of number local variable, there is little documentation specifying the correct way to input values in an array. The documentation needs to be improve and/or the error message that pops when evaluating your statement should be fixed to better demonstrate the problem. The current error states "Variable or property types do not match or are not compatible. This value will cause a run-time error." A getting started documentation that addresses variable syntax would also be helpful, these ideas will improve ease of use for people working in TestStand. The typical syntax when working with arrays is the use of a bracket  and the error that appears when using a bracket for arrays is even less helpful. Attached is an image of an example of the fixed error that would demonstrate this problem more thoroughly (The red highlighted section would be a potential change to the errors).
Professional Development package should include source code control (SCC) and Requirements Gateway right out of the box.
I know that bundled SCC was a problem in the past that NI wants to avoid, but I feel that a "Professional" development system isn't very professional without it and Requirements Gateway. However, It is very difficult and painful for me to get separate funds approved for important items that really needs to be already there right out of the box.
I already use free SVN, but TestStand does not recognize it, so it is not "integrated".
According to this forum discussion the Flow step types behave different compared to other step types, making customization hard:
Rectifying the behaviour of the Step types may be out of reach as this would dig too deep into architecture.
But there is a lack of documentation of the behaviour of these steps. E.g. just to mention the fact that step type functionality is in those cases tied to the step type name would help a lot.
Even though we already have an About box for TestStand, it would also be nice to have one for the active TestSequence file as well. The Help menu would have a new item called "About MySequenceFile ...".
MySequenceFile About box splash screen:
The information in this screen should be loaded directly from a single FileGlobal string whenever a sequence file is made active. This can probably be done already by those that know how, but it should be already part of TestStand by default.
A TestStand configuration wizard
I would like to see a TestStand configuration wizard that would walk a developer through a checklist of all of the most important configuration settings and generate recommended changes.
It is best for a developer to be already familiar with Best Practices as in the following link:
Best Practices for Improving NI TestStand System Performance
However, it would also be nice to have assistance in recording WHY certain choices are made as shown in this image:
The TestStand documentation describes the ControlExecFlow user subproperty as follows:
"User can control the flow of execution by setting breakpoints, single-stepping, and using the Set Next Step command. User can use the Run Mode command in a user interface. User can use the Run Mode command in the TestStand Sequence Editor but only if the EditSequenceFiles subproperty is also True."
This description should be amended to include the fact that the value of this subproperty also enables or disables options in run-time error dialogs (Retry, Ignore, Abort, and Break). TestStand users will see run-time error dialogs with different options based on the value of this subproperty.
NOTE: The ControlExecFlow user subproperty description can be found in the online help under NI TestStand Environment Reference Help>>TestStand Sequence Editor Menus, Panes, and Windows>>Windows>>User Manager Window>>User and Group Privileges.
Expose the sequence file version number to be visible in the file properties. (select file in windows explorer -> right click -> properties -> details).
When for example we do right click -> properties -> details tab on .dll assembly we see:
When we do the same on the .seq file we see:
Exposing sequence file version number can simplyfy checking version file number. Now to chek it we have to open sequence file in editor.
It would be good if the documentation tool would have option/report like described below.
After triggering this option user would received the report about every possible flow of the main sequence along with the list of the variables which drive the flow.
Value added by this feature:
1. full view about how many flows the sequence is able to be executed,
2. what variables are involved in the flow of the main sequence,
3. general overview about what and when subsequences and steps are executed,
4. where the flows is splited up and merged back.
This functionality would be great for sanity analysis and overall picture of the possible executions.
I suggest being able to group steps in a sequence:
Steps that are grouped should in interactive mode be forced to be handled together, e.g. "Run selected steps" would always select all the steps in the group. This way you could re-use certain steps multiple times down the sequence without allowing such steps to be executed by themselves (or the opposite, make sure certain steps were never executed without surrounding safeguards).
Today we'd usually enclose such must-work-together steps inside sub-sequences, but that solution does not safeguard against selecting a single step within that sub-sequence for execution by itself, and sometimes putting steps in a sub-sequence is non-optimal (one such case is when you have disabled tracing into subsequences, but this particular set of steps you'd like to have tracing on - I know there are ways to go about this, but these are cumbersome and non-trivial to spot when editing the sequence).
I wouldn't add any extra configuration options to a group, it should simply be a group/ungroup thing - all settings still being on a per step basis.
The use cases for a group could be expanded into making it easier to select a co-working set of steps for copying and pasting, it would be a good way to document co-working steps and so on.
Currently we can’t move or add additional results above the ‘Parameters’ if the subsequence or module has parameter list. It would be useful if we have an option to move the selected result to log in the Additional Results of step settings to desired position/row.
Similary with in the Parameters list, it would be useful if we have an option to rearrage the list.
The description of the round function in option 4 says as below:
However, the round function behaves differently:
The TestStand R&D team is committed to reviewing every idea submitted via the TestStand Idea Exchange. However, we cannot guarantee the implementation of any TestStand Idea Exchange submission until further documented.