DQMH Consortium Toolkits Feature Requests

Hi,

Today when I finish creating an event / module, If I want to create a new one I've got to click again on Tools => Delacor => DQMH => Create...

Sometimes, after planning my architecture I'll need to create several modules/events in a row to start building my app.

Going through the menus each time is a pain in such case.

Maybe replacing the OK button by a Create button and a Create and Continue button would help to this (like you can have using Redmine for example).

The Create button would act like the OK button today.

The Create and Continue button would generate the new event / module but without closing the window.

It would simply reset the fields to their defaut values (and reopen a new virgin payload/paramater window in case of creating an event).

This way creating several items in a row would be really faster and easier.

(more details in the ppt attached)

When adding an helper loop from the scripter, add a checkbox that would allow creating a subVI that contains the helper loop.

This checkbox should be unchecked by default.

If checked, a (private) VI is create and contains the helper loop.

The subVI is then dropped inside the Main.vi where the helper loop would have been created.

Hi,

Most of the time we create multi-layer applications, and bottom modules need to share information that might have to cross several upper layers.

To avoid coupling and jumps between any non-adjacent layers, we have to create similar broadcast in the parent modules to repeat child broadcast one layer upper.

It would be interesting to have a utility that 'copies' an existing broadcast from one module into another.

And maybe have an option to code the forwarding :

1. automatically register for child broadcast in the parent if not done already
2. in the selected braodcast EHL case, map broadcast arguments onto parent broadcast VI inputs

I guess the same thing can be done when the communication needs to go down the layers, and therfore applied to requests.

Today most of our screens support a 1920x1080 resolution.

And the actual space that I can basically use in the MHL is 530x315 pixels (roughly, surface of the MHL minus subdiagram comment).

Which means that my useful coding surface is only 30% of my screen resolution.

I guess the EHL and MHL can be designed wider so that we have more space for our custom code.

When validating a number of modules and going through the list of fixes, it's sometimes hard to keep track of what has already been fixed.

It would be nice to have some information on which failures were already fixed, and whether the fix was applied successfully or if there were errors or if there's a need for manual work.

I just put some icons into the screenshot to illustrate my idea - my feature request asks for a prettier implementation 😉

The below image comes from the Error Reported broadcast event case in the API Tester (as found in the default Singleton or Cloneable DQMH module templates):

This produces strings that look like this:

This could be improved by adding the "message" component of the error, by using the Simple Error Handler.vi.  Using the message makes the error report more descriptive, and doesn't rely on the user having to use "Explain Error" to review what the error code's could possibly be related to.

This produces strings that look like this:

Observe that the error message is now present in the text.

Hi,

In order to reduce the number of clicks to launch a DQMH scripter, that would be great to be able to launch them from the LabVIEW New... menu !

Indeed this window has several advantages :

1. The tree view keeps its layout from one excution to another. So if the last thing I did from that window was to launch the 'New Event...' scripter, next time I'll launch this window this item will be directly accessible
2. It allows inserting the created code into the project or not. So to create quick code without adding it to the currently open project, this is quite usefull
3. The tree view makes easier to choose the scripter to launch. With Tools menu, if the mouse pointer accidently leaves the menu and overs another menu entry, you've got to go back and re-do some of the menu selection process
4. A LV keyboard shortcut can be added to the New... action. In my case I redirected the CTRL+N shortcut to launch the 'New...' window instead of triggering the 'New VI' action. It would allow me to launch a scripter with 1 keyboard shortcut + 1 double click ! Quite fast !

Original idea from Matthias Baudot in https://anchor.fm/wired-in-software/episodes/Episode-6---Matthias-Baudot-from-Studio-Bods-emtpti

When you have lots of modules (20+), initializing module selector control tends to take seconds that can be annoying when you need to use the scripting tools.

Finding a way to remove this init time would greatly improve the user experience in large application development.

I use the Show Diagram debugging request on DQMH modules all the time. But sometimes it's not quite enough, like if there is a bug in my module *initialization*. By the time I fire the Show Diagram request, there is no way for me to debug the initialization problem. And when I say "initialization", I'm not only referring to the Initialize message in the MHL, but also all the code on the left side of the diagram that executes before we even get to the EHL and MHL.

I propose the following:

1. Add a new data member to the Module Admin class: "Show Diagram on Init"

2. Add a new input to Start Module.vi that sets this flag on the Module Admin class that is passed to the Main VI. Default is FALSE.

3. In the Main VI, if this flag is true, then Init Module.vi will show the diagram of the main VI on initialization AND turn on Retain Wire Values.

With these changes, the block diagram of the Main VI will appear immediately on init, and we can probe any wires on the diagram that executed during initialization to see their values.

It would be nice if there were a validate+fixer for this, but given that it is a debugging feature (as opposed to a change in framework behavior), I'm fine if there is no validate+fixer.

Hi,

Including DQMH modules into our application framework, we need to script the creation of new modules / requests and so on.

However, current scripting GUIs do not have any controls connected to the connector pane.

Also, even if we could pass some values to these interfaces, we would even need to control if we want to show their HMI or control the creation / cancellation of a scripting action whitout having to press on the OK / Cancel button.

Allowing to programmatically control the DQMH scripting VIs would be great !!

It would be awesome if the DQMH validation tool could go back more than one version.

eg.  If you open an old piece of code (that was written in say DQMH 4.2), the only way to upgrade it to 6.1 is to one version at a time, upgrade the code step by step.  This would mean the following:

 - Install DQMH 5.

 - Run Validation tool

 - Install DQMH 6

 - Run Validation tool

 - Install DQMH 6.1

 - Run Validation tool

This is a rather painful process, and when faced with this, I have decided to simply implement the module again starting from the latest version, and porting the code over rather than go through that.

Neither approach is obviously ideal.

We really need a tool that can convert an older module up to the latest standard.  This will become a more common problem now that we have DQMH-based code out there from 2018 onwards.  The more people use it, the more this problem will surface.

I feel like a DQMH module isn't "valid" if its Main VI or its Tester are broken. Right now a module with either of these VIs being broken can pass all validation tests. If something goes wrong after I've run some module "fixers" (or perhaps an external factor has caused my module to become broken without my knowledge), the DQMH Validate Module tool seems like a good place to let me know about it.

Note: I couldn't find any idea/discussion about it and it's surprising. If I missed something, please point it out to me and accept my apology.

The idea would be to access the most used scripting tool via Quick Drop.

My wish list:

• Create New DQMH Event...
• Add New DQMH Module...

It's not completely related to the framework itself, but I'd like to have a tool to generate an "error VI" (like Module Not Running--error.vi) with custom error code not already use in the project or selected among the existing ones.

If we could also have an API that list error codes and text, I would like it 🙂

It would be great to have an API that provides functions to :

• list project DQMH modules (with /type/icon/ (responsibility description <-- see previous request  
   
    ) 
• list request and broadcast for a module (with as many useful information that could be interesting to put in a project documentation) 
• for a request, which DQMH module/"stand alone VI" is calling it
• for a broadcast, which DQMH modules/"stand alone VI" register it

I have 'barebones' singleton and cloneable module templates that I always use when creating new DQMH modules for projects. I started with the shipping module templates and removed:

- 'Do Something' events

- All #Bookmarks

- Simulate EHL/MHL error buttons

I propose DQMH ship with these simple module templates. They help save several minutes when creating a new module. I'm not suggesting changing the project template, but rather simply adding two new options in the Add New DQMH Module drop-down:

I'm open to suggestions for different names. 🙂

Let developer create own DQMH validation test which allows them to test company specific style and scripting.

At that point, it would although be great to store a test configuration. E.g. which tests should be executed and which severity a failing test hast. 

JKI State machine has a great tool that comes with it, when you right clic on a BD element of a VI that contains a JKI State Machine, the option menu has the item "JKI State Machine explorer", fantastic tool to facilitate browsing the numerous frames of the case and of the event structure.

A similar tool for the DQMH module would be a great help!

If you want to pass a parameter to your module when it starts, you can add that parameter as an input to Start Module VI:

The way you define the type of the Call By Reference node (to accept the new parameter) is usually by dragging the Main VI into the VI Reference constant wired to Open VI Reference. However, sometimes a different VI may be used to define the type, especially if there are multiple DQMH Modules in your project that take the same inputs on initialization. Also, the opposite situation can occur where you add an input to the Main VI connector pane, but forget to add that input to the Start Module VI.

If the connector pane of the Main VI doesn't match the VI Reference constant in the Start Module VI, you will receive an error when attempting to start the module. I propose that we add a Validate Module test that detects this situation (connector panes of Main VI and VI Reference constant don't match) and returns a validation failure.