Control Reference Improvement

[JackDunaway]

The current implementation of Control References on the Block Diagram could be improved. This Idea was first conceived over a year ago in a discussion on Smaller Static Refs, in the comments here.

Consider the following advantages:

1. It's generally bad style to have Ctl Refs with hidden labels. New implementation always demonstrates the label to comply with inherent self-documentation of G (just like a Local)
2. Smaller footprint combined with better visual distinction between Ctl Refs doubly improves information density
3. In general, the Control Class does not need to be shown at all times on the BD. Rather, it could be shown in Context Help (currently, CH is not useful when hovering over Controls Refs, but this is another topic), or determined by browsing Properties/Methods.
4. Eliminates the undesirable ability to rename/delete a Control Ref Label such that it no longer matches the Terminal Label.
5. Creates a better distinction between a Control Ref and a Control Class Constant (NULL Ref). The color of the Static Refs denote a "live link" with a control, while the muted tones of a Class Constant indicate no such link (NULL)
6. Complements the new LV2010 Local Variable upgrade (see image), yet remains distinct by having a different glyph, different background colors, and no directionality arrow

In summary, a Control Reference revamp could reduce the footprint, increase readability, and prevent obfuscation that decouples the Static Control Ref from the Control.

[X.]

I am glad this idea was posted, saving me the effort to write it up, but unfortunately, it seems to have been totally interred by NI (last comment in 2010?).

Trying to revive interest for it with this post, since the number of votes in 2013-2014 was minuscule.

BTW, there is a VERY interesting information showing up when you click on the Kudo number of an idea to check out who gave kudos and when: the number of kudo per person.

Any guess as of what this might be?

[RavensFan]

The lithium forums have some setting where it would be possible to for a user to give multiple kudoes.  How this is administered, I don't know.  (Would a person with higher status be able to kudo a post more highly?  I wouldn't want a spammer/scammer coming in as part of a new post kudoing garbage highly.  It would be ripe for abuse.)

In our case, it doesn't matter.  NI configured their implementation of the forums to be only a single kudo per customer.

[JimChretz]

I like it and I kudoed, but I'm wondering what we would do for example with "This VI" reference?

For Local variables, it takes the entire label, no cropping. Which is fine because we normally never create a very long label for a control.

But for VIs in big project, to be consistent I think LabVIEW would have no choice to include the library path in the name, which will be long quite often in big projects.

What do you think? 

[Manzolli]

Agree with jimmy.chretien