In Place Index and Replace

[Hooovahh]

This is again one of those things that could be an Ideas Exchange to some, and a bug to others.  If I have a 1D array, and I use the Index function it starts at index 0 without having to wire anything to the index terminal.  If I use an In Place Element Structure and choose the Index and Replace Array I get a broken arrow if I leave the index terminal un wired.

Also If I wire an index with a value of 5, when I expand it down I expect it to index element 6, and 7, and 8 and continue for the size of the index function.  Here again is where the native Index function behaves differently from the IPE index and replace.  Is this a bug?  Is this an Idea of how the IPE should work?

[comrade]

I would expect the IPE to behave exactly like the index function. Didn't even realize it doesn't!

Kudos for the idea, Hooovah.

[Yamaeda]

I'd consider that a bug, the only difference should be that it works in the same memory, nothing else.

/Y

[tst · Accepted solution]

It was already suggested here - http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Provide-good-defaults-for-unwired-indices-of-the-array...

And here (which discusses a slightly different behavior with >1D arrays) - http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Allow-unwired-index-for-quot-Array-Index-Replace-Eleme...

We also had a discussion which touched on the topic of how the IPES behaves here - http://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Set-index-inputs-on-LVOOP-array-element-accessors-to-R...

[Hooovahh]

When I posted this topic the forum made me search (as is expected) but in the forums nothing came up.  Glad to see great minds are already thinking about this.

[ben64]

Got confronted with this issue today using LV2014. The 2015 beta version was annouced not long ago, hope the change will be made in this version.

Ben64