LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Blinking property of referenced String indicator does not work under Unit test Framework

Attached is a project which demonstrates, what I believe is a bug.

 

When I start "VITSetup.vi" directly such that the VI Under Test (VIT) "BlinkRefnum.vi" is called directly, the string indicator from which I pass a refnum to the VIT correctly blinks on the "VITSetup.vi" front-panel.

 

But when I start "VITSetup.vi" as a setup VI within a test-case of the Unit Test Framework (UTF), and pass a parameter into "VITSetup.vi" to cause it to pass the string-indicator refnum back out for passing into the VIT, the string control does not blink.

 

Visibility property works. Setting of a Value property string works. But blinking property does not.

If I read the property it says it is set but the indicator on the front-panel does not blink.

 

Does anyone have experience of this problem?

Is there a workaround?

 

I am using LabVIEW 2012 SP1 with Unit Test Framework Toolkit 2012.

 

Thanks.

0 Kudos
Message 1 of 4
(2,010 Views)

Blinking only happens while a vi is not idle (Is running)  So, when your set-up vi runs the property works.  after clicking Done the set-up vi exits and passes out a ref to your vi under test.  Text.Text gets updated but since the vi is idle no blinks.


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
0 Kudos
Message 2 of 4
(2,002 Views)

So is there a simple way of establishing a continuous loop in a Setup VI (to stop it going idle), and yet pass control to the Unit Test Framework so that it can exercise the VIT? Would it need some special programming of the Setup VI to get separate threads running? Any clues? Or are we limited to just testing the properties of the Refnum String indicator at Teardown and just trust that Blinking actually works?

 

Thanks.

0 Kudos
Message 3 of 4
(1,962 Views)

Time to break out the user defined test template.

 

File>>New...  VI\From template\Unit Test Framework\User-Defined Test Template.vit.  Test the properties on the fly and compare them to whatever is expected.


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
0 Kudos
Message 4 of 4
(1,948 Views)