Why can't I inline a VI that has an Expression Node on the BD?

[GuenterMueller]

That's exactly what I have done to five VIs in between, Jeff.

Two of the Expression Nodes were of the type "Degrees to Radians" which I obviously got by applying Quick Drop. 

Actually, replacing Expression Nodes by corresponding functions is no project but a short-term job;)

[altenbach]

---

@GuenterMueller wrote:

Two of the Expression Nodes were of the type "Degrees to Radians" which I obviously got by applying Quick Drop. 

Actually, replacing Expression Nodes by corresponding functions is no project but a short-term job;)

---

My case was even simpler, just a x1000 (to convert between microcsonds and nanoseconds). The only reason I originally used an expression node is because it is vertically smaller and there was local crowding due to all other wires going into the next function. 😄

[Kyle97330]

FWIW these converters inline just fine:

[JÞB]

---

@Kyle97330 wrote:

FWIW these converters inline just fine:

---

What version?

@ GM.  Gosh,  I broke out NEETS 19 earlier for another post.  Table 1-24 shows deg×1.745e-2=radians 

[JÞB]

And the converse x57.3 of course.

Good enough for NASA:)

[Kyle97330]

---

@JÞB wrote:

---

@Kyle97330 wrote:

FWIW these converters inline just fine:

---

What version?

@ GM.  Gosh,  I broke out NEETS 19 earlier for another post.  Table 1-24 shows deg×1.745e-2=radians 

---

I tested it on 2015.  It probably works back to any version that has the "Convert unit" node, which was something like version 7.1 I think... 

[JÞB]

---

@Kyle97330 wrote:

---

@JÞB wrote:

---

@Kyle97330 wrote:

FWIW these converters inline just fine:

---

What version?

@ GM.  Gosh,  I broke out NEETS 19 earlier for another post.  Table 1-24 shows deg×1.745e-2=radians 

---

I tested it on 2015.  It probably works back to any version that has the "Convert unit" node, which was something like version 7.1 I think... 

---

Kyle, inlining code is a bit more complex than a subvi.  It's a much newer feature than 7.1 supports. 

Inlined subvis are really compiled into the callers.... with full G compiler optmizations....  what did you think inline meant?

As far as I know 4.0 had units...

[rolfk]

---

@JÞB wrote:

---

@Kyle97330

---

Kyle, inlining code is a bit more complex than a subvi.  It's a much newer feature than 7.1 supports. 

Inlined subvis are really compiled into the callers.... with full G compiler optmizations....  what did you think inline meant?

As far as I know 4.0 had units...

---

I think he meant to say that if you really want to use the formula/expression node for unit conversion you may be better of using the unit conversion node, which looks similar but is more convenient and can be inlined!

[wiebe@CARYA]

So back to the topic: why can't I inline a VI that has an Expression Node on the BD?

It has always seem random to me. Like at some point it couldn't be tested properly, so they just disabled it or something...