Add boolean text specifier in format into string

[JimChretz]

I wish there was a boolean text specifier for Format into String functions.

% followed by "?" would expect two possible strings like this. Why not?

[wiebe@CARYA]

Well, I coined the %b myself, so I'm not going to argue (much) 😁.

That is sound reasoning...

[JimChretz]

Currently LabVIEW rerturns no error if we have a string connected to the terminal like this:

[wiebe@CARYA]

Pretty much everything between < and > in a format specifier seems to be ignored, except for %<>T, where it is actually used:

I think that helps this cause... It makes this adjustment an extension, without having to change how things work.

[Yamaeda]

There already is: %s.

[srlm]

Yamaeda: %s doesn't let you specify the strings, which is the request. The idea is essentially a trinary operator buried in the format string. 

[AristosQueue(NI)]

I’m with Darren on this. Putting more computation into the format string is something I oppose generally. Why? Harder to debug, easier to hide strange behaviors, harder syntax to read, and not directly discoverable to write. When the alternative is directly and easily expressed on the diagram, as Darren shows, I see mostly downsides to more format syntax. 

[wiebe@CARYA]

But the plain solution doesn't allow dynamic formatting .

If the formatting comes from the user or other external recourse, you're screwed.

Not implementing this because it's harder to read (only when you use it), is actually causing code to be much, much (much) more complex.

If this was implemented, you can still choose to not use it because it's harder to read. If it's not implemented, you don't have a choice.

[JimChretz]

The syntax apparently already exists, instead of ignoring the code between angle brackets LabVIEW should use it, the code below should output "Pass".

[wiebe@CARYA]

As noted 5 posts ago 😉 (Add boolean text specifier in format into string)