Distributed Control & Automation Framework (DCAF)

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

DCAF Module/Feature Wish List

This is the place to let us know what features and/or modules you wish existed in DCAF.  One idea per comment, please.  If you would also like to see something that has already been mentioned, please press the star button to give kudos to the comment.

 

The DCAF development team will keep an eye on this list, but we can't make guarantees as to whether a request will get implemented.  

Cheers,

Matt Pollock
National Instruments
0 Kudos
Message 1 of 19
(10,569 Views)

DDS module to interface with the RTI DDS toolkit (on Windows and cRIO)

Cheers,

Matt Pollock
National Instruments
Message 2 of 19
(10,568 Views)

@MattP wrote:

DDS module to interface with the RTI DDS toolkit (on Windows and cRIO)

This module is available in beta form now at https://github.com/LabVIEW-DCAF/dds

Cheers,

Matt Pollock
National Instruments
0 Kudos
Message 3 of 19
(10,425 Views)

I would prefer that the configuration file existed in some form that is easily diff-able. If you have any sort of code review, process, using the current configuration file is not nessecarily easy.

Message 4 of 19
(10,404 Views)

@KeenanJohnson wrote:

I would prefer that the configuration file existed in some form that is easily diff-able. If you have any sort of code review, process, using the current configuration file is not nessecarily easy.


It's currently an xml file with serialized class data.  Is there a particular other format that would contain the same information but be easier for your process to work with?

Cheers,

Matt Pollock
National Instruments
0 Kudos
Message 5 of 19
(10,401 Views)

I would prefer that the config contain only the source "config" information, and the entire serialized class.

 

For instance, if I change which channels are logged in the TDMS module, I want the review to be able to just diff a file and see the changes in channels. However, because the entire class is serialized, there is a lot of extraneous data, that doesn't contain line breaks, making it incredibly difficult to verify.

0 Kudos
Message 6 of 19
(10,387 Views)

Would having the equivalent of Pretty Print for the XML be sufficient (make it easier to separate out the data you care about vs. the extraneous data), or do you actually need the extraneous data removed?

 

It's pretty straightforward to prettify the existing format, it would be a major breaking change to switch to a different format.

Cheers,

Matt Pollock
National Instruments
0 Kudos
Message 7 of 19
(10,268 Views)

Cleaning up the XML would certainly help, but for my usecase, it would certainly be preferable to strip out the generate data entirely.

0 Kudos
Message 8 of 19
(10,260 Views)

Added issue to Github to track the prettifying part of this request: https://github.com/LabVIEW-DCAF/TagEditorCore/issues/273

 

Changing the format entirely is not currently happening, but is something we'll keep an eye on.

Cheers,

Matt Pollock
National Instruments
0 Kudos
Message 9 of 19
(10,256 Views)

A standard text import/export (like "File Import/Export" in Standard Engine Tags)  feature set across all modules.

0 Kudos
Message 10 of 19
(10,229 Views)