LabVIEW Idea Exchange

Community Browser
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!
Top Kudoed Authors
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Do you have an idea for LabVIEW NXG?


Use the in-product feedback feature to tell us what we’re doing well and what we can improve. NI R&D monitors feedback submissions and evaluates them for upcoming LabVIEW NXG releases. Tell us what you think!

Post an idea

These context menu items should be swapped to be intuitively ordered so Before is before After and After is after Before. With a Case Structure, Diagram Disable Structure, Conditional Disable Structure, and Flat Sequence Structure, the right-click pop-up menu items to Add Case, Subdiagram, or Frame After are first and before the Add ... Before items. These being opposite intuition always make me pause and think to pick the right one. Help us be more productive, please.

When setting up In Place Element structures, the current work flow is:

 

  • Drop the structure
  • Right click, add the node you want
  • Wire the reference / array / variant in

It would also be nice to wire the references I want to use to the border of my IPE structure, right click on the tunnel (c.f. for and while loop auto-indexing context, or shift register/tunnel) and select from a sensible list of incoming element types relevant to my incoming wire.

This would be fantastic to see alongside similar ideas such as this or this.

dvr-rcm.png

Having a continuous integration system is an essential component of software development:

Continuous Integration ProcessContinuous Integration Process

This system requires automating the building process.

The LabVIEW development environment unfortunately does not have built-in tools to achieve this easily.

But the community has supplied a few sollutions to achieve this: CLI Tool

 

On of the biggest hurdles that yet remain, is the fact that the application builder is inherently tied to the development environment.

This requires a valid license for the environment and all toolkits / technologies used in the source code of the product you intend to build.

 

My proposal would be to have a special "CI" license in which all required modules and toolkits are activated, and that would allow the development environment to launch in some sort of protected mode that prevents users from actively developping code (while still allowing scripting functions), for the sole purpose of building applications.

Title says all. Can't believe it was never proposed; if it was, I couldn't find.

Missing that, I have to that programmatically, but it's always a detour:

2017-09-28_11-42-52.png

Should be quite easy to change the property page like e.g:

LabVIEW_2017-09-28_11-02-36.png

(6 colors for system booleans, 4 for all others, as known)

 

 

I've been programming in LabVIEW for a decade.  Yet, there is still an issue with type def'ing a cluster.  If one of the goals of LabVIEW programming is documentation, why does NI still make it the process difficult?   

 

After creating then 'type def' a cluster, I then have to more spend time unhiding and repositioning labels. This gets extremely inefficient with large cluster.

 

Why not add an option to hide or leave labels untouched when 'type def'ing a cluster?

 

2017-10-25 10_40_31- LabVIEW issue.png

 

The LabVIEW Task Manager is an outstanding tool for debugging LabVIEW Applications. It should be included in LabVIEW in my opinion.

 

a345fe65cbe713b29f505a851e0fe597.PNG

I find the new Channel wires very useful things! However, I really miss one type/variation which would make a real many-to-many lossless message sending possible, but also with total control over where the msgs end up in case of multiple readers! Imagine that we have a Channel wire which can be branched, and you can also specify a "destination label" (could be a number, or string, etc.) at the Write nodes. This new Channel type would allow multiple Write and Read nodes. At the Read nodes, we could also specify the "destination label", so ONLY those Reader nodes would get the actual message which are subscribed for that particular "label".

 

I can program this functionality, but it would be great to have such features in a single Channel wire...

What do you think? Is this a good idea or you see some caveats/downsides of such Channel?

When a 1 Dimensional array of any type is showing only a single element, LabVIEW forces a horizontal scrollbar. I couldn't find any documentation or reasoning behind it. It's really annoying and ruins UI design that Vertical is the normal scrolling direction for just about everything else ever and LV messes that up for some seemingly arbitrary reason.

As discussed here, please incorporate the System Controls 2.0 UI elements into core LabVIEW. This would eliminate the need to visit VIPM to obtain the full functionality of the System UI control palette. System Controls 2.0 is not an additional UI style, rather it is the partial completion of the original System controls palette.

 

Including these controls in the default installation would allow the merging of these two palette entries for those that use the System controls for UI development.

 

system.png

 

 

The In Place Array Index/Replace Elements function not only can save memory by avoiding copying arrays, it can also create "neater" and more transparent Block Diagrams.  For example, here are two ways to triple the third element in an Array of 3 elements:

 

Array Index-Replace 1D.png

I needed to do the same thing, but for a 2D array (three channels of A/D data, I wanted to triple the third channel).  The Help for the In Place Array Index/Replace Subset function suggests this is possible, using language like "element or element(s) of an array", noting the similarity between this In Place Structure and the two Array Functions that form the Input and Output nodes, and in earlier versions of LabVIEW (specifically LabVIEW 2012), explicit reference to rows, columns, and pages as replacement items.  Here's what happens:

Array Index-Replace 2D.png

The Index Array left node forces you to specify both row and column, meaning you cannot operate on a single row (or single column), "breaking" the functionality with the separate Index Array/Replace Subset functions.  This also, I believe, will force an Array Copy operation, something I'm (also) trying to avoid.

 

At its most benign, there is a Documentation "Bug" that should warn users that this In Place function is only designed for single array elements (which, in my opinion, severely limits its usefulness).  I would like to suggest that this function be "fixed" to (a) for multi-dimension Arrays, allow, as with Index Array and Replace Subset, flexible choice of one or more Indices to be specified, with the unspecified Indices implying "All of the Elements", i.e. an entire Row, Column, Page, etc, and (b) maintain the "In Place" functionality by having this function generate the necessary code (behind the scenes) to access the specified elements and do whatever operation is required inside the Structure.

 

I appreciate that requirement (b) might be difficult.  For instance, operating on a row in a 2D array should be easy, as the (row) elements should be continguous, making getting and putting them simple.  However, if a column is specified, getting successive elements and putting them back becomes more complex.  To the User, it all "looks simple" -- you get a 1D wire out, operate on it (say, multiply it by 3), and stick it back "in place", but the LabVIEW compiler has to "get" elements from non-continuous locations and put them back where it got them, but that's what Compilers are for!

 

Bob Schor

I would like to have the possibility to "negate" some comparison functions such as "Empty String/Path?". This can avoid to add the "Not" operator.

The picture below is a possible implementation. The dot on the input (on the output ok also) is showing the negation.

Labview Idea.png

This might be good to be implemented for the following functions:

Labview Idea 2.png

Take for example an enum that is saved as a type def. The enum has many items (let's say words) of varying length.

 

In order to see all of the elements, inclusive of the widest one, the array can be sized with the right-click option "Size to Widest Element".

 

If the type def'd enum is edited, and a longer element is added, the array of enum constants will not size to the widest element. This can be frustrating, as dozens (or more) of these arrays scattered about the program are rendered unreadable.

 

If the user has previously chosen to "Size to Widest Element", this setting should persist. If the user edits the enum, all of the array constants should size to the widest element.

 

-------------------------- Example ----------------------------------------------------------------------

 size to widest.pngsize to widest2.png

 

 

 

 

Here's a dumb mistake I think many of us can relate to:

bundle_by_name.gif

It would be really nice if the VI were just broken in this situation. But I can understand why it's not necessarily simple to mark node *outputs* as required.

 

 

But maybe there could be a way for the editor to *hint* that there is a problem here. Maybe the bundle nodes could change color when the output terminal is wired, so you could get a little more obvious feedback if you screwed up like this.  The same could go for any other primitives that have a "for type" input (e.g. unflatten from string, variant to data, to more specific class, etc).

 

Granted, VI Analyzer could report bugs like this, but having a little more immediate feedback would probably be a big win.

 

(Let me know if this should be cross-posted to the NXG idea exchange, too).

Bookmarks should NOT be created unless the first character after # is an alphabetic character. http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/371361N-01/lvhowto/manage_tasks_lv/ says "hashtag followed by text is called a bookmark." Although it says # followed by text, it is not only creating them from alphabet characters but also numbers and symbols, e.g. "ID #132", "(###-###-####)". The number of unintended entries in the Bookmark Manager can render the feature almost worthless, especially when upgrading from 2012 or earlier. There are so many non-bookmark values that the presence of any real bookmark (e.g. code to fix) is lost like a needle in a haystack. I know others (e.g. QFang) liberally use "#" in controls, indicators, descriptions, comments, etc. as shorthand for "number" or "number of". There should be few objections since digits and symbols can be in bookmarks after the first character following #.

Please let me opt out from this new feature, introduced in LabVIEW 2017, permanently in the setup dialog.

Using LabVIEW for a very long time (since LabVIEW 2.0), I never wished such a feature (it got only 27 Kudoes) - and - I am even using it's "anti feature", implemented up to now, constructively to detach objects (Pull control into a structure, connect it to the new target - and "Ctrl B").

This new feature, forced onto everybody, would be less annoying, if pressing "W" would reliably disable the feature. However,  at least in vritual windows machines (Parallels) on a Mac, it does not work 50% of the time.

 

Once in a while I encounter a case or event list that forces me to grow the structure

- in order to keep the list readable:

Selector.png

It would be nice if the item-list would automatically "wrap" instead.  

Selector4.png

The "Read Key (Double).vi" is not giving out proper values when a SI notation number is present in the ini file. For e.g. if the number is 1m it returns as 1 while the actual value should be 0.001. It will be helpful if the format specifier is provided as another control.

When using the Distributed System Manager to remove processes a dialog is shown confirming their removal, along with a list of the processes to be removed. Depending on display resolution and the number of processes to be removed, the dialog extends well past the bottom of the screen, making the Yes and No buttons largely unusable.

 

dsm_remove_process_dialog.PNG

Instead, the list of processes to be removed should be shown in a list box, table, or similar with a vertical scrollbar, and the confirmation dialog remain a sensible size.

 

(I know I can just hit Enter as Yes is the default option, or remove fewer processes at once, but that's beside the point!)

This idea is to improve the QuickDrop search window, to return functions that might be betters suited, based on the datatype of the selected function or wire.  Lets say I have a 1D array of numerics selected and I want to reverse it.  I will select the wire, then invoke QD and type "reverse".  But the first item in the list is actually "Reverse String".  With a context aware QD hopefully the search window will see I have an array of numerics, and prioritize the Reverse 1D Array function, and still include the reverse string but maybe push it farther down the list.  

 

This idea can be applied to the basic data types pretty easily (numerics, boolean, array, string, cluster).  But we could also use this on class wires that are selected.  A class library can have an associated mnu file, which is why some functions you can right click and the corresponding subpalette menu comes up.  So this idea could also prioritize functions that are found in the mnu associated with the class.

DO NOT treat references to controls and indicators as bookmarks because bookmarks cannot be used in control or indicator labels! http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/371361N-01/lvhowto/manage_tasks_lv/ says "You cannot use bookmarks in control or indicator labels." However, LabVIEW DOES treat a hashtag (#) in the label of references corresponding to controls and indicators as bookmarks. The problem is that the reference to a control or indicator supports bookmarks but should not. Service Request #7710815 said according to R&D, “this does appear to be an intended function”; In other words, they expect for a hashtag bookmark to be created from the label of a reference to a control or indicator whose labels themselves cannot be bookmarks! Who expects the label of a reference to support a bookmark when what it refers to is an object that does not support bookmarks especially when their text values must be identical? I certainly do not. It seems to be an oversight by NI developers. Is an NI customer going to want to put a hashtag in a control or indicator knowing that bookmarks are not supported there but actually want it references to be bookmarks? Certainly not.

 

Steps to Reproduce:

1. Create new VI, create control, set label to “#1”, open block diagram, create reference; the label is a bold bookmark.

2. In LabVIEW 2012 or earlier, create new VI, create control, set label to “#1”, and create a reference on the block diagram. Open the VI in LabVIEW 2013 or later. The reference’s label shows bold “#” instead of plain text “#1”; note that it is cut off despite “size to text”. Our label names have been customer visible for over seven years; renaming them is unsatisfactory. See hashref.jpg.