LabVIEW Idea Exchange

Community Browser
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Post an idea

When creating an installer for a built LabVIEW application, it is very difficult (see here) to include an additional 3rd party installer (such as a device driver or application that your built application depends upon).  What I'd like to see is a solution that treats 3rd party installers as first class citizens.  I'm imagining a new "Additional 3rd Party Installers" page of the Installer build specification properties dialog.

 

2-3-2010 1-35-27 PM.png

 

This page might look something like the one in the screenshot below, allowing users to add a folder that contains the 3rd party installer files and define a command that is run inside that folder during the install process.

 

2-3-2010 1-41-08 PM.png

 

When LabVIEW builds the installer, it would suck the additional installer folders into the main installer and, after installing your app files and the additional NI installers, it would sequencially extract your additional 3rd party installers into a temp folder and then execute the command line to run.  This is a pretty simple scheme that would really simplify the process for end users.

 

I'm sure I didn't address every issue of this use case, so please, everyone, feel free to add your own ideas.  I'd love to hear your comments.

I think it would be nice if LabVIEW was smart enough to know that when I drop a For Loop around scalar inputs it doesn't auto-index output tunnels - but rather uses Shift Registers - for matching inputs and outputs.

The common use case for this is with the Error input/output - it annoys me how it becomes an Array output.

 

As it is already wired, inline and not broken, dropping a For Loop around it should not break my code! 

 

Reference or Class inputs are other use case too - I want to pass the same thing around not create an Array

Shift registers are better than non-auto-indexed tunnels (other option) as they protect the inputs on zero iterations.

 

21826iFF181EE2E7ECE408

 

This would remove one step required for most use cases, speeding up my development experience.

The State Diagram Editor was a very cool tool and lots of LabVIEW users (not only beginners, far from!) are missing it!

 

And no, the state chart module is not a replacement for the State Diagram Editor!

 

Discussion here.

 

Image borowed from Ben

The concept of fluent interfaces using method chaining applied to a LabVIEW block diagram would be awesome!

 

When calling .NET libraries from LabVIEW, block diagrams explode horizontally - the aspect ratio of the diagram can easily push 5:1 or worse (it's 10:1 in the example below). Some Method Chaining syntactical sugar would yield a more space-efficient-and-readable 4:3 to 16:9 or so.

 

Property Chaining is already well-established in LabVIEW - let's get us some Method Chaining!

 

LabVIEW-Idex-Proposed-Fluent-Interface-with-Method-Chaining.png

 

See the first comment for footnotes...

Is LabVIEW available for Android based systems and other touch interface systems.If not how about using LabVIEW for mobile measurements using these systems.

For distribution, only package necessary libraries in installer packages built with the project. A lightweight UI, server, or client does not need a full 70MB+ installer that bloats out to a few hundred MB's once installed! A colleague has remarked that the total size of our LabVIEW application+RTE EXCEEDS the entire size of the XPe image running on the embedded computer! This becomes an issue when distributing software upgrades to places in the world without high-speed internet connectivity.
Subversion is one of the most popular SCC systems in use yet currently LabVIEW can only integrate with the help of rather flakey 3rd party plugins. It would be so much easier if LabVIEW included native SubVersion support, allowing full integration with the LabVIEW Project etc.

If you have mulitple versions of LabVIEW installed, some of them show up in the "Open With" menu, but regardless of which item you select, the VI will always open in whichever version of LabVIEW was opened most recently.

 

Example: if I opened a legacy VI in LabVIEW 2009, closed that version of LabVIEW completely, and opened another VI using the "Open with" menu and selected LabVIEW 12..., LabVIEW 2009 is relaunched and is unable to open the VI because it should have launched in LabVIEW 2012.

 

 

OpenWith.png

The current workaround is to add all installed versions as options in the "Send to" menu, but this is not nearly as intuitive as using "Open with" would be.

 

Add a module to LabVIEW to use it on Android OS or Apple iOS. 

 

People have already been getting smartphones for awhile.  And now in 2011, there are so many manufacturers that make tablets with Android OS or even Windows.  Apple iOS is considered to be the cool thing but Android OS is more open and used by more manufacturers (since only Apple for it's iOS).  Since the Andorid Tablet is so new, yes there are more Apple tablets out there than Android tablets but if it's like the smartphone market, Android OS will overtake the iOS market.  It's just a matter of time. 

 

I don't know whether one is easier to code than another, but if you had the time I think a module for both the Android OS and the Apple iOS would be extremely powerful.  Wouldn't it be great if we could run an instrument from our phones or tablets?!?! 

 

But I would just be careful to make sure the module was robust and not too many key features were missing from the full LabVIEW version.  In the past, we tried the PDA Module and Touch Panel Module for an instrument and it didn't work out.  The module was very buggy and missing a lot of features from LabVIEW that we though were important key ones.  We ended up abandoning the PDA module idea and went with an advantech touch panel computer with Windows XP and just kept writing with regular LabVIEW.

reference case structure.jpg

 

 

I have pondered this and not sure it is possible but it would be nice to allow using case structures to work with vi server references.  It is very tedious to test each type with a cast to more specific and the for each type and check for error (current method or itterating through the class hierarchy).

I know that subclasses pose an issue, I would like to see for the case structure to limit each case to select the highest level (ie g object) and the distince cases are error or any direct class child of the specified parent type class.

 

The Use case I see is for handling itterating through controls from an array of controls (if the control is a boolean do something different than if the reference is to a string control).

Could be very nice for scripting.

 

 

 

 

 

I wish LabVIEW had Official Container (Docker) Images.

 

With more and more users trying to use the docker in Continuous Integration, it would be 

interesting supporting a NI Official Image on Docker Hub (or any other place). Containers provide an easy way of creating reproducible tests and builds.

 

The build of LabVIEW docker images has been feasible since NI Package Manager command line was launched, and for NI wouldn't be a new thing.

 

The advantage is that the images (Windows, Linux or Mac OS) could be optimized by NI team only for working for LabVIEW, shrinking size and removing unused files.

 

Anyone else would support this idea or has anything to complement?

I have seen a few posts online indicating a couple of changes here and there for LVMerge and LVDiff.  I think the main problem is that we just want it to work with third party SCM tools like Mercurial / TortoiseHG, SVN / TortoiseSVN, RTC (Rational Team Concert), Surround, ect.  The ability to check in and out from project explorer is not quite cutting it.  With more and more developers using distributed SCC products like GIT or Mercurial the ability to merge and diff becomes really important.  Here is a list of what I would like to see in newer versions of LabVIEW and the LVMerge and LVDiff tools that would give us more time to develop code and less time spent managing software.

 

1. Both LVMerge and LVDiff work ok with a single vi, but not that well when hierarchies are different.  Most SCC applications will only download one file or the files that are different between change sets when merging or differencing change sets.  The basic problem is that in order to diff or merge LabVIEW requires the vi to be loaded which requires loading dependencies.  If the merge and diff tools didn’t require the vi’s dependencies to be loaded into memory then many of the issues just go away.

 

 I understand the technical challenges in order to implement this feature, but I think it would be a far better approach then trying to write a huge amount of code in order to handle multiple SCC tools.  Even if that code was written the workaround solutions are not pretty.  For example you would have to download both change set’s entire hierarchies to disk and then compare them.  How well will that work with very large projects?  Or with a merge where you need three version of the hierarchy?

 

I think the better solution is to just make LabVIEW files act like text files when diff and merges are performed.  The information in the LabVIEW file points to dependencies, and if those dependencies’s attributes change then flag them, but LabVIEW should be able to generate the LabVIEW "file" in a vacuum for differencing and merging.  May require caching more information about dependencies then what is currently saved in the vi, but I think that would allow a better merge / diff utility.

 

2. Support differencing and merging of all LabVIEW file types (projects, xctls, classes, libraries...).  Sometimes the text merge features in some programs don't take into account the complexity of the relationships between LabVIEW files.  It would be nicer to have a visual diff in terms of how LabVIEW treats the file (e.g. how TestStand differences sequence files).

 

3.  This is more of a bug fix, but improve the merge windows.  I have found a couple of situations where the code being merged is not even shown in the three windows (base, theirs, mine) and I cannot scroll to that location in the code to intelligently perform the merge.

 

4. LVMerge exe exits right away before the merge is complete.  TortoiseHG thinks the merge is complete for a file when the exe exits so it blows right past all of the other file merges so only the first file is merged.

 

5. Cover these use cases as differences between change sets when merging and differencing (item 1 solution should cover these):

Setup: use TortoiseHG to difference an entire change set in the repository with the local drive, or merge two change set in the repository.

  • Moved files (not just vi's) in the hierarchy
  • Deleted files in the hierarchy
  • Files added or removed from classes/libraries/projects
  • File 1 changed and dependency File 2 changes it's connector pane connection to work with the changes in file 1
  • Both new change sets add the same file that the base change set does not contain
  • Same as the last item, but added file has a different location on the hard drive between the change sets

There are probably more that I am not thinking of, but that would be a good start.

 

6. Simplify the entire process by providing a real IDE for merging and differencing files.  I am envisioning something with a hierarchy of views like Beyond Compare.  It would allow you to simplify some actions at a high level, but would give you the power to perform advanced actions.  For example, present a list of differences, types of differences, and the types of merges possible. 

  • Maybe some files can be auto-merged
  • SCC thinks the files were different but there are only cosmetic changes
  • User could choose between a deleted file or a changed file
  • Two versions are different but the user knows which one to choose without performing a merge.

The user should be able to have a quick view (no loading dependencies), or double click on the item and a new tab comes up that allows an actual file merge (vi, class, project, ect.).

 

 I think a tool like that that has the ability to interface with third party SCC tools would be a huge timesaver especially when dealing with distributed environments where merges occur more often.  It may need to stream all of the changes from a tool like TortoiseHG before performing a merge (probably easiest implementation), or rewrite the GUI for managing Mercurial or GIT change sets directly.

 

 The other option is to say "just use a check in check out central repository SCC", and I would say Phooeey! to that. Smiley Happy  After using Mercurial with TortoiseHG for a while I would not switch to anything other then another distributed SCC application...even with the difficulties with the merges and differences, using another system still poses similar problems (sometimes even worse) and the software management in those programs just stifles productivity.  Has anyone ever tried to move a class and its members to a different directory after the code has already been checked into an SCC tool like Perforce?  How about managing a multi-branch project where stable release updates are not only applied to the trunk but to a major feature branch?  Painful...

 

I think that these changes to the LabVIEW development environment will move us from “writing LabVIEW code” to “software development using LabVIEW”.

I would like a control/indicator which supports HTML formatting for display and documentation.  There have been a couple of previous similar requests, here and here, but nothing specific to HTML (although jlocanis has been consistent in his comments on these previous requests asking for HTML formatting).

 

I would envision a control where you enter HTML and can change the display from the HTML to the rendered text easily, similar to the multiple modes available on current text controls.

 

Why HTML and not just more formatting options?

 

  1. Why reinvent the wheel.  HTML has been around for decades and works well.
  2. You can mix fonts, localizations, superscript/subscript, symbols, etc. within HTML, allowing much more flexibility when documenting front panels.
  3. HTML is platform agnostic

As has been said in other requests, extending HTML support to captions, labels, etc. would also be nice, but secondary.

Currently in LabVIEW you can have a top-level palette (Programming, Measurement I/O, etc) automatically populate based on .mnu files existing in the folder structure at <LabVIEW>\menus\Categories\.  However you cannot do this with the sub-palettes such as Arrays, File I/O etc.

 

I propose to allow auto-populating palettes for all LabVIEW palettes so developers can place their own palette within the appropriate LabVIEW palette for their functions.  One example is OpenG and MGI each have a palette of Array functions.  They are currently placed in a top-level OpenG\Array or MGI\Array location.  If we could sync these folders, we could place each of the array palettes under the Programming\Array palettes:

 

palettefolder.png

 

Simply by dropping their corresponding mnu files here:

 

palettefolder.png

 

Thoughts?  Discussion on LAVA that spawned this idea is here.

This is something a few power users have asked me about. There's no Instrument Driver or VIPM Idea Exchange, so I thought I would post it here.


What if VIPM could manage Instrument Drivers from IDNet?
There are a few key benefits this would offer us...

  • download IDNet drivers directly from VIPM 
  • track which version of a driver you are using for different projects and revert when necessary 
  • wrap up ID dependencies in a VIPC file for use at a customer site
Install Other Version.png
Get Info.png 

Hello,

 

I would like to suggest that LabVIEW support HDF5 for data format, file storage and data transfer.   I would to suggest the support include maintenance to coincide with new and future versions of HDF5.

 

Thank you.

The title says it all.

In 2021 there was excitement about improvements to LVCompare and LVMerge, however there is still no way to compare classes or libraries.

I'm ok with not merging. I know that is a minefield. But at least show me what methods were added, what library or class settings were changed, which VIs moved from private to public and for classes, diff the private data and maybe show changes to the class heirarchy?

There are many VIs located beneath the "<LabVIEW>\resource" folder that need to be called as subVIs of LabVIEW add-ons (e.g. project providers need to call provider API VIs located there).  However, because the resource folder is not a Symbolic Path this introduces many challenges for LabVIEW add-on developers.  LabVIEW add-ons that link to VIs beneath the resource folder cannot be moved to a new location (for example as part of a source distribution build step), otherwise they will not be able to find these resource subVIs (since they link via a relative path between the caller and subVI, rather than a relative path between the resource folder and the subVI).  Note that NI doesn't really feel this "pain" since most of the add-ons NI develops are developed "in place" beneath LabVIEW and ship with LabVIEW -- they don't get "built" and they don't get "installed".  However, for 3rd party add-on developers, it's critical that the resource folder be a symbolic path.

 

Note: This would make building packages of project provider plug-ins possible with VIPM.

Back in the NI-CAN days, there was a handy development tool which was the usage of two virtual CAN ports, ports CAN256, and CAN257.  If you wrote a frame on one, it would be read on the other, and vise versa.  Other CAN hardware like Vector, and Kvasar support virtual CAN hardware which does something similar, where initial development can be tested before having access to the hardware.

 

This idea is to add virtual hardware support for XNET which supports this same feature.  it has been talked about in a thread here several years ago, but nothing ever came of it.  Adding support for virutal hardware for CAN, LIN, Flex-Ray and any other XNET hardware would be a great development tool, and enable the testing of the expected handshaking of software, with simulated communications.

Recently I've talked to companies that are already using LabVIEW and their organization has standardized on tools such as JIRA for bug tracking/project tracking as part of an organization-wide initiative.  JIRA connects to other IDEs/programming tools such as VisualStudio, Eclipse, IntelliJ, etc.  Atlassian (the company that makes JIRA) also provides tools that can part of a larger Agile process and can facilitate code reviews and other software development processes.

 

JIRA.png

 

The idea up for vote is to offer more comprehensive LabVIEW interoperability with industry standard tools such as JIRA, or other software as part of an internal software design process.  (feel free to specify a certain tool, if you have a preference)