Automatically invert compound arithmetic inputs when switching inputs

[jacemdom]

Sometimes switching the inputs of compound arithmetic functions (ctrl+click) makes the diagram easier to follow. When this happens on nodes were one of the inputs are inverted, both inputs have to be inverted after switching the wires. This is probably the use case 99% of the time and thus should be automatically done.

[X.]

I would say this is a bug more than a missing feature.

[AristosQueue (NI)]

Speaking as R&D: I do not believe we have enough information to claim 99% -- or any specific percent. The switcheroo tool is used both for cleaning up diagrams and for correcting wiring mistakes. In the first, you probably want the invert to move. In the second, you don't. In the absence of data on which is more prevalent, the principle of least surprise comes into play. Jacemdom is a user who wants the inversion to swap. He is happy if it does swap. If it doesn't swap, is he surprised? Probably not. On the other hand, a user who does not want the inversion to swap. If it doesn't, he is happy. If it does, is he surprised? I'm going to argue, yes, that is a surprise, because that goes beyond the instinctive remit of the switcheroo tool, which is that it flips wires on terminals. It doesn't change node settings generally. In general, I would call the current behavior correct for the userbase overall.

Speaking as an individual G programmer: I don't care one way or the other, but I will add this to the ongoing list of reasons why I prefer the Not primitive over the inversion dots. I get why some programmers like them, but they are so easy to over look, I find that they are generally more trouble than they are worth. Regardless of whether they switch or not, I'd probably overlook the fact that it happened or that it didn't happen just as often.

[jacemdom]

Did not have big hopes of it going through, but the only sure way to don't make it happen is not to ask 🙂

[X.]

@AQ: I don't have the mental flexibility anymore (if I ever had it) to figure out what the outcome of a switch between two boolean inputs (without simulatenous adjustment of the inputs modifiers) will do to the result. So I would never use switcheroo to intentionally modify the underlying logic.

I'd argue that if you had 3 or 4 inputs and where switching repeatedly to untie knots in wires, you would share my point of view.

But I get that from a fundamental CS point of view, your comment makes sense.

[SteveVetter]

I highly agree with the original post.  I estimate that I switch 95% of the time to clean up the diagram, and at most 5% because I wired to the wrong terminal.  However, I realize those numbers may be different for others.  Also, long the line of "least surprise" it is not advisable to change the current behavior.

Thus, what I recommend is if I use the Shift key while switching, it will switch the inversions also.  If I don't the behavior is exactly as it is now.  I bounced this idea around at the recent CLA Summit and got very favorable response.

[AristosQueue (NI)]

> Thus, what I recommend is if I use the Shift key while switching, it will switch the inversions also. If I don't the behavior is exactly as it is now

How would anyone discover that keyboard shortcut? It's pointless for us to add shortcuts like that if the only people who will ever know about them are the ones who read the upgrade notes completely for the one LV release where they are new or who happen to hear through word of mouth.

I'm not opposed to these kinds of shortcuts, but we've got to stop having "magic knowledge osmosis" be the only way these things get learned.

Any suggestions for this one being discovered?

[Darren]

> I'm not opposed to these kinds of shortcuts, but we've got to stop having "magic knowledge osmosis" be the only way these things get learned.

How else could they get learned? There's nothing about keyboard shortcuts that is inherently discoverable. And I hate when we duplicate a keyboard shortcut in a menu or something just to make it more "discoverable", when the only time it makes sense to use it is as a keyboard shortcut (and not as a menu).

I don't have an answer to this question, but I do think it would be cool if we had some sort of way to teach/remind users about features that they wouldn't otherwise discover. If somebody does have an idea on how to solve this, maybe they could post it to the idea exchange. 🙂

[SteveVetter]

While I agree that it is not immediately obvious, but my point was to leave the current functionality untouched.  So, if you don't care about this feature, it's not an issue.  But, on numerous occasions I've introduced a bug because of the way this works currently, so I for one would love to have an alternative.

[crossrulz]

It's all documented in the Help.  But let's be honest, who actually goes through the help for a list of shortcuts?

[AristosQueue (NI)]

> who actually goes through the help for a list of shortcuts?

The people writing training courses to figure out what to teach. 🙂

Joking aside, there are users who do read the shortcut list, for exactly this reason. But they are not common.