As CVI evolves (in age and functionality) I feel that additional efforts are required for maintaining the product, i.e, keeping it 'consistent' and avoiding a 'mosaic look' as if assembled by different engineers in different decades...
A simple example but also one I would like to see resolved is entering data types in the UI editor vs in a function call (PlotIntensity in this case):
So, for example, long long translates to int64... Why not simply use the identical terms??
I agree it could be worse but I also feel that this is a valid suggestion for future improvements...
When operating graphs in Labview, it is easy to change the scale of an axis of a graph (at runtime): to change e.g. the maximum value, you select the current maximum value with your mouse, type in the maximum number you want and hit enter. To achieve the same in Labwindows, you have to use a numeric control and a button, which is a bit cumbersome. The same applies for zooming: In Labview, you can click a small button attached to the graph and select the way you want to zoom, and then just use the mouse. In Labwindows, you have to know that zooming is done using the ctrl button, ctrl+space restores the previous setting, etc. It would also be nice to be able to enable autoscale by right-clicking on an axis and having a popup menu which allows to do so (just like in Labview). And if the user changes e.g. the maximum value while autoscale is enabled, it would be nice to automatically disable autoscale (unlike in Labview).
So in general, it would be nice to have more comfort in operating graph controls.
Attaching controls to a splitter in the UIR editor can be a pain if the panel has several controls on it. I'll make an example using CVI example SendMail: trying to add a vertical splitter and attach all controls to it in order to rearrange the panel when the user resizes it. This is the original panel, you can see the vertical splitter in the upper right corner:
First of all, if several controls are selected, they overlap in the right panel of the editor in a way different from the original panel. Here you can see that the decoration indicated by the arrow overlaps two string controls that I'm not able to operate on to select desired attachment mode. This means that I need to proceed to attach controls in steps, hoping new controls added are not overlapped by previous ones. Alternatively I can move controls in the right panel to encover hidden ones, but this ingenerates confusion as controls are no more in the original position besides being a waste of time.
Second item: if selected controls are on the "wrong" side of the panel, they are all grouped (and possibly overlapped) on the closest boundary of the right window. See this example: Send and Quit buttons are only partially visible on the lower left corner of the right window and additionally they are overlapped (in the small box how they appear if I select one of them and move it upwards):
I suggest that this function is improved with these additions:
At present, you cannot edit text attributes when several controls are selected. It would be nice to be able to set text attributes the same way as we can set other attributes (e.g. status of leds or min/max limits for numerics and so on).
I am interested both in attributes for control text and control label.
I have had severe problems in development, due to a high synergy between my lack of attention and CVI behavior in search/replace dialogs.
I am talking about the fact that Find/Replace parameters [namely search directories] are stored at REGISTRY level, so that they remain the same across different workspaces.
Having to work with different version of the same software product, I have found myself looking into the wrong sources, or even doing mass updates, due to the fact that different projects have identically named sources and includes, just in different directory trees, and rapidly switching from one workspace
to the next I didn't "mind the step"
My suggestion, thus, is to store find/replace parameters at workspace or project level, so as to avoid the aforementioned inconvenience
Improve the Breakpoints Window, so that breakpoints can be more easily managed.
1. Change the Breakpoints Window, from a modal dialog to a dockable window (similar to the Watch Window). Debugging can be more easy this way.
2. Allow breakpoints to be grouped, disabled/enabled and edited in user defined categories. This allows users to easily collectively manage several breakpoints at a time. It also helps the user to logically group breakpoints, depending on various issues issues that he might be working on.
3. Breakpoints could also be sorted from a pop-up menu by filename, line, hit count, etc.
I have a table with several columns. Let's assume I want to modify properties of column 5. It would be nice if when clicking on column 5 in the UI editor this column would be preselected. Right now, the table editor opens and one has to manually select a column...
I would like to have the possibility to store the uir-file not as a tui-file (old-fashioned ini file), instead as a xml file.
If you have, say, three controls called MAX_1, MAX_2, MAX_3 arranged vertically. If I select them all, copy and paste, the new controls appear as MAX_4, MAX_5 and MAX_6 but in the wrong order to what you would expect.
A similar issue occurs with assigning a group of controls to a control array, they always seem to be in the wrong order, usually reversed.
Even after using CVI for many years I still find the DirSelectPopup confusing, because it provides a file selector, displays files, and even allows to select files...
I would prefer an improved/modified function such that the DirSelectPopup only shows directories, does not provide a file selector, etc.... This should make it much more obvious that one is selecting a directory, not a file...
imho the nice tool tips feature provided by the Programmer's Toolbox leads a miserable existence, because it is extra effort integrating it into a GUI.
I would love to see the tool tips integrated into the IDE, that is, when editing a control in the GUI editor, I would like to be able to also set the tool tips text and if it is initially enabled, just like it is possible to enter a control label text. This would include moving the tool tips from the Toolbox to the regular user interface library.
The current features of the UI editor with respect to editing tooltips are VERY limited. I am not complaining because one has to start somewhere
Instead I am adding yet another suggestion on this subject
Please provide the possibility to enter tab stops, see my comment here
Because this is such a modest request, please also consider this one
In these days, I have been debugging a complex application(almost 12,000 lines of code) and it was very hard to do a map showing the relationshing at least of some critical functions.
For this reason, I consider that a very helpful debugging tool could be to add in LabWindows/CVI, a window like the VI Hierarchy in LabVIEW; that shows the relationship beetween the functions inside all the module in a CVI project. This windows will show which functions calls a particular function.
Here, there is a very simple example:
It has been suggested much earlier here, but obviously passed out of mind:
When using 'Go to Definition' (CTrl+I) while in release configuration, CVI tells that no source code information was found for the identifier '...', because 'Browse information is not available in the Release configuration'... (still true for CVI2010)
This can and should be improved!
And it might be a good opportunity to also add the reverse process, 'Goto Declaration', suggested here
While defining attachment mode for controls attached to a splitter we face a very strange situation. In this image you can see on the right the aspect of the window with one control selected in "Controls on the splitter" window in Attach/Detach Controls dialog. On the right the same dialog when you click on Attachment mode control:
Now, there are two strange effects:
I suggest that at least that ring is not disabled when clicking on it or clicking away from "Controls on the splitter" box.
(this suggestion refers to CVI up to 2012SP1, I cannot check it for more recent releases)
Similiar to LabVIEW, I would like to have a "save as" option to store all files within the prj-file to a new location (maybe also for store a cws, res all mentioned prj-files).
Would make it easier to handle over a CVI-project.
Currently, there is no way to access the historical data on a stripchart. The only way to manage this data is to maintain a separate buffer and update it whenever you add data to the strip chart, which is inefficient and tedious. Accessing data is possible for graph controls using the data attribute:
GetPlotAttribute (panel, PANEL_GRAPH, plotHandle, ATTR_PLOT_XDATA, &data);
Something similar should be implemented for the strip chart, either as an attribute in the getTraceAttribute function, or as a standalone function (getTraceData, etc.)
Right now if multiple controls are selected you cannot jump to the code with "View control callback" menu option or Ctrl+B accelerator even if they have the same callback. It could be handy to be permitted to go to source if selected controls have the same callback.
Consider this scenario:
On a panel you create two buttons, select both of them and edit their properties assigning a (unique) callback to both. Next with both controls selected you generate the callback using "Generate Control Callback" or Ctrl+G. Now you would like to go and code something in the callback but you're not allowed to: you need multiple clicks to go to source: one click anywhere on the panel to deselect controls, one to select one of the buttons and finally the right click or accelerator key. Not very handy...
This would make it a bit easier to edit an old project without the issue of upgraded UIRs because it might get loaded by the wrong CVI version and one edits and accidentally saves it before noticing.
Visual Studio installs a helper EXE which launches the right Studio for any SLN.
If MS didn't patent this , it would be a nice feature for CVI (and LabView?), too.
Note: the LabWindows/CVI Idea Exchange is not the appropriate forum to submit technical support questions.
The LabWindows/CVI R&D team is committed to reviewing every idea submitted via the LabWindows/CVI Idea Exchange. However, we cannot guarantee the implementation of any LabWindows/CVI Idea Exchange submission.