LabVIEW
Adaptive alignment for subdiagram label
@cy... wrote:
...whenever the structure exceeded 2 screen widths.
That's your problem right there. If you (or the one who made the code) follow the development guidelines and keep the maximum size to be smaller than one screen, you wouldn't need this. See the LabVIEW style checklist.
"LV should have been bundled with some SCC tools"
- LV was bundled with its own SCC tool once, and it was a horrible experience. Thank god its not. But new users should somehow be helped into understanding why SCC is important. Introduction to programming should mention SCC (and maybe it does).
Search LabVIEW like a graph! "LV is bundled with some SCC tools"
- Yes there are tools to use with SCC if that's what you mean, but I think he meant something like Git or SVN.
There's this:
Can't say I ever used it, I'm OK with external tools.
Also there's LVMerge and LV Compare.
but even with SCC, it can help but still doesn't ensure LV itself load the right file. if only there is an option for LV to save the whole project as a single file, automatically saving all right dependencies. that will make sure the codes are loaded correctly
How is a single file different from a single folder hierarchy?
I keep everything in a single folder hierarchy, and if dependencies are not in that hierarchy, a single file won't work either.
without the SCC, lengthy low level function sequences should have some support like auto-centering labeling for structure sub labels, including case selector labels. or some new floating "skewer" wires that create dependencies between functions without actually connecting the connector pane terminals, that would save significant space between frames (by replacing sequence structure)
I really can't see the relation between SCC and auto-centering for labels...
It's OT anyway...
@cy... wrote:
>There's this:
isn't that for external SCC?
Yes, all SCC is external 😉.
I see now that you want LabVIEW to have build-in, "internal", SCC.
IMHO, It wouldn't be good if NI had to actually make that. It would cost resources, the result wouldn't be as good as external tools, external tools support multiple flavors, etc.
@cy... wrote:
>How is a single file different from a single folder hierarchy?
in a shared location, folder contents can be renamed/replaced/moved/deleted, not to mention that single file is was easier for manage, as opposed to my daily routine of zipping folders. furthermore, within a single file, we can also have version history tracking for subVIs, in case of any changes/updates.
One file is easier to manage? We used to have llbs. Those where one file, and terrible.
>in a shared location, folder contents can be renamed/replaced/moved/deleted,
Yes, that is easy managing. Very convenient, for me...
> as opposed to my daily routine of zipping folders
That is why people use SCC.
Why not use an external SCC? Git or HG don't require a remote repository.
>we can also have version history tracking for subVIs
VIs have a version history. You can even get a popup at each save, prompting for changes.
Never used it, SCC is a better experience in every way...
@cy... wrote:
>I really can't see the relation between SCC and auto-centering for labels...
my bad, auto-centering of labels can assist for large structures with low level functions where SCC is unavailable to control the subVI versions. alternatively, to reduce the BD size, the "skewer" idea is just another way to represent dependency without using frames, but the compromise may be readability.
The version history of VIs would help for that (if SCC can't be used).
