Flat sequence structures have been proven through usability testing to be more readable and adding this functionality would encourage more people to use stacked sequence structures.
Why we should not be able to add shift registers to stacked sequences becuase it will eliminate the break of direction of data flow due to sequence locals.
We should be able to put data to shift register in 1st frame and access it in next frame.
I think the bad part of the code is the Sequence local. If NI makes the following changes to the Sequence locals it will be a good.
1) Restrict the Sequence locals to be on the left and right borders instead of all places.
2) Keep two terminals (left and right) for each sequence Local similar to Shift Registers
so that to enforce the Left to right wiring.
Flat sequence structures have been proven through usability testing to be more readable and adding this functionality would encourage more people to use stacked sequence structures.
I agree on most of the points. For those who want to use such a template to shorten their code a bit, my post in the following thread may be usefull, though:
Flat sequence structures have been proven through usability testing to be more readable and adding this functionality would encourage more people to use stacked sequence structures.
I don't need this functionality to justify using stacked sequence structures. They are one of my main tools for keeping really big programs manageable, graphically speaking. Don't take my stacked sequences away!
To the original poster Punjab: instead of shift registers, just use local variables.
DanSome, that is the exact type of programming we are against. Locals are not good. Use a state machine! It is a lot more managable and scalable.
There are only two ways to tell somebody thanks: Kudos and Marked Solutions Unofficial Forum Rules and Guidelines "Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God" - 2 Corinthians 3:5
I disagree about killing this idea. The stacked sequence is a brilliantly simple way to sequence actions without need for state machine, and it needs a shift register. I create elegant and clean code all the time with stacked sequences and I'm fully aware of what state machines are for, and I think state machines are misused/overused in LabVIEW and take too long to implement for such simple tasks as "Do A, B, C". In fact I think the complaint about stacked sequences is as misplaced as the point that Local/Global variables are not to be used, for example, because they can cause race conditions or because they're not memory efficient. All code structures can be misused. For my money, both sequences and locals/globals are indisposable, and their limitations can easily be eliminated.
Please don't kill stacked (or flat) sequences, just look for ways to eliminate or prevent some of the tempting misuses people have with them both. In fact, if everyone's aware of what those limtations are, let's fix them. For example, stacked sequences need conditional terminals.
