LabVIEW Idea Exchange

About LabVIEW Idea Exchange

Have a LabVIEW Idea?

  1. Browse by label or search in the LabVIEW Idea Exchange to see if your idea has previously been submitted. If your idea exists be sure to vote for the idea by giving it kudos to indicate your approval!
  2. If your idea has not been submitted click Post New Idea to submit a product idea to the LabVIEW Idea Exchange. Be sure to submit a separate post for each idea.
  3. Watch as the community gives your idea kudos and adds their input.
  4. As NI R&D considers the idea, they will change the idea status.
  5. Give kudos to other ideas that you would like to see in a future version of LabVIEW!
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Ray.R

Have a special property node for single items

Status: Declined

Any idea that has received less than 2 kudos within 2 years after posting will be automatically declined.

The idea is that if you need a property node for a single property item, the property node would look more like a VI, where the error out is located at the bottom.

 

For example, how often do people use the "Bytes at Port" property node only to crosswire the error cluster and the number of bytes at the port.

 

See image below:

 

 

The suggested node would have a single property in the center and have the error out at the bottom.  This would permit to have a nice routing of the wires at the output.

Of couse, we could always create a sub-vi which contains the property node and thus has the nice straight wires to go to the VISA Read.vi.

 

Let's see what other people think.

 

 

 

10 Comments
RavensFan
Knight of NI

This sounds a lot like this idea.

 

Property Node Error Input and Output on the bottom

Knight of NI
I have to ask: what's wrong with the crosswire?
Ray.R
Knight of NI

I had not seen that one.  It's a similar idea, but since expanding the property node would not make sense with the error cluster wire hanging at the bottom, it would be good to have a single property which would be in the middle.

 

Crossed wires?  The problem is not the crossing of the wires.  You must have used the Bytes at Port property which is wired to the VISA Read.  It's the way they cross each other which makes the code a bit messay at that area since they practically overlap each other.

 

See what I mean?

 

 

I am treating this one as a particular case because this property node is available as a "ready-made" property in the VISA palette.  Now if they simply had a nomal square icon, then that would be fine or even preferred.. 

 

  

Heck.  I'll just do my own and keep it in my library. 

 

 

Ray.R
Knight of NI

Forgot to mention something else...

 

While describing good coding practices and mentioning to keep the wires straight, why would we want to endorse crossing the wires?  What's wrong with doing it right?   After all, if we suggest that to new coders, we would we then suggest that crossed wires are okay?  That doesn't make sense to me.. 

Knight of NI
I never said anything about endorsing crossing wires. However, in your top part of the image the wiring seems perfectly fine to me. After all, crosswires are not evil. Besides, sometimes they're inevitable since you're dealing with a 2D drawing surface.
Ray.R
Knight of NI

You're right, there's nothing evil about crossed-wires.  Just an esthetics thing.

 

Maybe with the oncoming of 3D-tv's we'll be able to wire at different layers.  Actually CAD programs are already there... (layers).

Now that would be messy!

 

 

somebody_that_i_used_to_k
Trusted Enthusiast

Multi-layer VI with vias? I'll stick to my single layer (not even dual-sided!) SMT VI's for sanity's sake. 🙂

Wirebird Labs: Expert Toolkits for LabVIEWDeploy, by Wirebird Labs: Expert Toolkits for LabVIEW
Knight of NI

Ray.R wrote:

You're right, there's nothing evil about crossed-wires.  Just an esthetics thing.


I would agree with this. 

 


Maybe with the oncoming of 3D-tv's we'll be able to wire at different layers.  Actually CAD programs are already there... (layers).

Now that would be messy!


Hmmm... Wonder if the wiring cleanup tool will be up to the task. The PCB designer sits next to me, and he's always re-routing the auto-magic auto-router, so I'm not holding my breath. 

 

Ray.R
Knight of NI

I hope you guys know I was kidding about 3D Labview..  😄

I do wonder if layering will change with CAD tools..  That's outside the scope of this thread..  

Darren
Proven Zealot
Status changed to: Declined

Any idea that has received less than 2 kudos within 2 years after posting will be automatically declined.

DNatt, NI