NI TestStand Idea Exchange

Community Browser
About NI TestStand Idea Exchange

Do you have a feature idea for how to improve NI TestStand? Submit and vote on ideas now!

  1. Browse by label or search in the TestStand Idea Exchange to see if your idea has previously been submitted. If your idea exists sure to vote for the idea by giving it kudos to indicate your approval!
  2. If your idea has not been submitted click Post New Idea to submit a product idea. Be sure to submit a separate post for each idea. Note: the TestStand Idea Exchange is not the appropriate forum to submit technical support questions.
  3. Watch as the community gives your idea kudos and adds their input.
  4. As NI R&D considers the idea, they will change the idea status.
  5. Give kudos to other ideas that you would like to see implemented!

The TestStand R&D team is committed to reviewing every idea submitted via the TestStand Idea Exchange. However, we cannot guarantee the implementation of any TestStand Idea Exchange submission until further documented.

Top Authors
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Post an idea

when manipulating data between different system, JSON string are very usefull to have a standardize, simple and readable exchange format.

 

Python or LabVIEW can dump structure (dictionnaires or Cluster) to JSON and vice versa.

It can be very usefull to allow to dump a TestStand variable or container to JSON and vice versa.

 

It can be good to have also a way to have native function in string functions to read, write or add a specific value in a JSON string.

 

MaximeR

Obviously it's not a great idea to have loads of nested conditional steps, but for longer sequences even with only a few nested conditions, I find it hard to find the matching END for example when an if-statement. Sure I can count the number of lines, but I think it would be a lot easier if the "scope line" that indicates the scope would stand out more and become bold or blue (like the selected line)

 

Here's are two mockups (bold line)

 

bold-line.png

 

An alternative indication could be to highlight the ending line of the scope like below.

 

end-highlight.png

 

Having a keyboard shortcut for jumping between beginning and the ending within a scope would also be very helpful!

In Microsoft Visual Studio there's a keyboard shortcut (CTRL + [ ) which toggles the cursor position between the and and beginning of a scope, and it works with all things that encapsulates a scope or a string or expression. e.g. curly braces in code sections, quoted strings etc.

CreateSameProperty.png

 

Let's say we have a parameter to a subsequence of a named type, and we want to create a so-named Local or FileGlobal with the same type.

One way to do this with our current workflow is to:

  • Type the same property name in the parameter value
  • Right-click the parameter
  • Click on "Create Locals.whatever"
  • mouse over the types menu
  • Glance through most of the types, select the custom type

 

I'm proposing a simpler workflow for cases when you just want to duplicate or "clone" the property with the same name and type in Locals or FileGlobals:

  • Right-click the empty parameter value
  • Select "Create Locals.whatever" or "Create FileGlobals.whatever"

The respective menu options would appear if the so-named variable does not already exist.

The subproperty is created in the Locals or FileGlobals with the same type as the parameter.

We have multiple sequences in a file to perform steps that are common to particular subsystems.  It would be nice to have the ability to group sequences within TestStand.  I could envision this to look like a treeview or folder/file structure within the Sequence Pane.  Currently, we have to use a common naming convention to group the sequences together like below:

 

GPIO_Inputs_[Seq1]

GPIO_Outputs_[Seq1]

GPIO_Outputs_[Seq2]

Communications_CAN_[Seq1]

Communications_Ethernet_[Seq1]

Communications_Ethernet_[Seq2]

Communications_UART_Port0_[Seq1]

Communications_UART_Port1_[Seq1]

Communications_UART_Port1_[Seq2]

 

With grouping, it could look similar to below:

 

Communications

    CAN

        [Seq1]

    Ethernet

        [Seq1]

        [Seq2]

    UART

        Port0

            [Seq1]

        Port1

            [Seq1]

            [Seq2]

GPIO

    Inputs

        [Seq1]

    Outputs

        [Seq1]

        [Seq2]

 

In addition, there could be a toolbar menu item to switch between showing the grouping or all so you could sort to find

 

 

Hi,
I would like to show the following problem with the Update Custom Data Type from Cluster tool when updating TestStand container type definition based on LabVIEW cluster.

 

TestStand creates new container type definition according to the LabVIEW cluster items order. The problem apears after you create the TestStand type definition and then reaorder LabVIEW cluster. After this change in LabVIEW, TestStand will not properlly reorder items in its definition. So for example:

  1. We have LabVIEW cluster { 1My String, 2My Numeric, 3My Boolean },
  2. Then we create TestStand type from it and we have { 1My_String, 2My_Numeric, 3My_Boolean},
  3. Now, we change order in LabVIEW { 3My Boolean, 1My String, 2My Numeric },
  4. TestStand do not see change,
  5. Then we add new item in LabVIEW { 3My Boolean, This is new, 1My String, 2My Numeric },
  6. Update in TestStand will be { This_is_new, 1My_String, 2My_Numeric, 3My_Boolean}.

 

So at the end we have:

  • in LabVIEW : { 3My Boolean, This is new, 1My String, 2My Numeric },
  • in TestStand : { This_is_new, 1My_String, 2My_Numeric, 3My_Boolean}.

 

IMO items order can be sometimes (if not always) important part of good style. That's why I would like to suggest to update also items order if you select Force Exact Match.

I would like to see the possibility to add Tools (Menu > Tools) to Toolbars. See the recording below:

tools.gif

 

As you can see from Tools section I can select only "Customize". It could be great to have the ability to use custom tools when customizing toolbars and menus.

Problem description:

The parameters out of the step settings window and the called subsequence are not linked. If you delete any parameter out of the middle of the parameter list and the calling sequence use the "default" flag for this parameter(s), this default flag(s) will be shifted to the next parameter in the list and the original value will be overwritten. To reproduce this issue:

 

  1. Create a test sequence
  2. Create a subsequence and add six parameters (type does not matter)
  3. Insert "Sequence call" in the Mainsequence and configure it to the previous created subsequence
  4. In the "StepSettings" window configure the parameters of the called sequence. Parameter 1+2 with any value. Parameter 3+4 with default checkbox. Parameter 5+6 with any value
  5. Save your work
  6. Open the subsequence and delete the parameter 3+4 (these two that are configured with "default" in the calling sequence")
  7. Go back to the MainSequence and click on the sequence call of the subsequence (reload option is visible in the step settings window)
  8. click on the blinking red reload button

You can see that the name of parameters you have deleted in the subsequence disappear, but the "default" flag(s) are shifted to the parameters 5+6 and the previous configured values were overwritten. If you delete any parameter that is configured without the default flag the deletion works fine. 

 

Problem: If you want to delete a parameter that is used in many subsequences by searching for it and delete it directly out of searchResult window, you cannot guarantee that your sequence is running without any problems

 

Idea: Add a "checkup function" on the "reload" module in the stepSettings menu that all parameters are checked by name and value before any values will be overwritten. This checkup has to be done on each change of the called subsequence

Static enumeration value in a sequence call must be stated as <Enum(String enumType, [String/Number value])>. Please make it possible to select the enumeration directly.

 

 
 

The property loader step allows the source location to be defined via an expression.  However, if that expression does not evaluate to a file on disk at compile time you get an error.  This isn't always desired behavior, for instance, when used in a plugin architecture.

 

Expression.PNG

 

The current workaround is to include a dummy file which could unnecessarily complicate the software & deployments.  A dummy file also has the potential to mask errors that should be presented to the user. 

 

The only validation TestStand does of the property loader source location file is that it exists.  It doesn't do any validation on the file contents.  So is there any benefit?  TestStand properly throws an error if the expression doesn't evaluate to a valid file.

 

Alternatively, a developer could deselect the sequence analyzer rule "Property Loader source should be proper", but this would disable it for all analysis not just the ones that use expressions

TestStand is in dire need of a way to quickly and effectively find broken steps in long sequences.

 

I'm working on large sequence files which often call and utilize other long sequences. Needless to say, I often need to address steps which have become broken due to code rework. As of now (TS 2017), there are only two ways for me to know if a step will not run.

  1. Text is red within the Step Settings window.
  2. Sequence Analyzer reports an Error.

I would like to suggest a third option, one that would be more readily available than either of the other two options. If the step itself was highlighted, text reddened, or somehow otherwise flagged as an error, then the operator won't have to hunt through each of the step settings windows or the sequence analyzer results. All the operator would have to do is open the sequence file and notice that a step appears out of place.

 

It would be nice if sequences could also show if they have broken steps.

 

Included is an example of how this might look.

 

TS_errors_are_highlighted.png

Download All

In instances of nested expressions, it would be useful to be able to press tab to indent a line. I propose inserting "n" spaces when pressing tab.

 

Coding style of course varies, but for readability, I rather dislike the following

 

Trim(Locals.SomeLocal) == "" ? (Locals.SomeLocal = "foo",Locals.AnotherLocal = "bar", Locals.SomethingOrRather = "zoo") : False

 ...and much prefer this styling:

 

Trim(Locals.SomeLocal) == "" ? ( Locals.SomeLocal = "foo", Locals.AnotherLocal = "bar", Locals.SomethingOrRather = "zoo" ) : False

...but at present the latter is tedious because one has to insert a lot of whitespace manually or worse yet, use another text editor and paste it into TestStand. It would be nice if TestStand's expression editor supported this basic feature available in almost every text editor or IDE.

 

Thanks,

 

Mr. Jim

 

 

 

Please include Wait(x mSec) or Delay(x mSec) operation as one of the method in sequence context, so that this can be used in Function Statement step, Post action of any step to force the step to wait for few mSec after completing it's operation. This is to avoid explicit inclusion of Wait step and majorly useful during looping a step and provide delay between each iteration.

Do you ever write an expression in TestStand with a bunch of parenthesis () and get lost halfway through trying to figure out which pairs are open and which are closed.  Well, I do.  Every Day.  And I spend accumulated hours a week just trying to keep track of which ) goes with which (.  If I'm lucky I can look for a little red item in the expression, or click on the check expression checkbox, but when I have a 'only runtime evaluatable' expression I'm out of luck (which is rather often) ).  Some languages/editors have a parenthesis matching, where the ) your cursor is on causes the matching ( to get bold or flash.  Others start coloring each pair a different color, so it's easy to see them all.  Why can't TestStand do something like this????

TSparenthesis.png

 

I would like to see commands like AllOf, AnyOf, AND, OR, etc. work with boolean arrays as inputs.

The settings field can easily become too long to see every active option and there's not necesarily any consistency between steps if they have differing options. What I mean by that is if you only set the "Do Not Record Result" (my favorite) option in one step, it will be on the left of the settings field. But if you now set several options on another step, the settings are not lined up so that it becomes hard to see at a quick glance which steps I forgot to not record (because TS still doesn't default to not recording steps). You have to analyze the settings line for each step.

Current settings.PNG

 

I propose something more graphical and ordered. Here's my idea of at least ordered. The text could be replaced with icons representing each setting.

Ordered settings.PNG

 

Then it would be graphical, ordered, and concise. What more can you ask for?

Forgive me for the cavalcade of suggestions this week...

 

One of my favorite options in the LabVIEW development environment is the "Find all Instances" context menu option, whereby one is able to locate all calls to the particular SubVI.

 

I have long wished that something similar were available in the TestStand Sequence Editor. I'd like to propose a "Find All Sequence Calls" context menu selection when right-clicking on a sequence in the Sequence pane. This could leverage the Find tool, but save the user from copying and pasting the name of the sequence. (And save the user from configuring the search options to narrow down the results) It'd be nice to be able to define the scope of the "find" operation to either the selected sequence or all sequences in memory, but I'd settle for a simple search of the open sequence.

 

Cheers,

 

Mr. Jim

 

FindAllSequenceCalls.png

 

 

When monitoring values within a loop in TestStand, it is often desired to only record step failure results.  It would be useful to have a "Result Recording Option" of "Enabled On Step Failure":

 

TestStand Idea Exchange - Enable Result Recording On Step Failure.png

 

This is possible through various means (SequenceFilePostResultListEntry callbacks and other custom code).  However, I believe this would simplify TestStand sequence development significantly.

It would be nice to be able to "fold" control flow blocks (like if - else -end, while - end etc.). Despite the vertical lines connecting the control flow steps on the same level, it is sometimes very hard to find where a long control block actually ends or what the condition for the "end" is you are currently looking at.

 

In such cases it would be helpful, if the entire control flow block could be hidden under its first line, tree-view like with a +/- icon to show/hide the interior of the block.

 

Regards

 

Peter

In the same way that the setup, main, and cleanup can be expanded or collapsed, do the same for all of the flow control steps.

 

Have the steps expanded by default.

 

I think it would make it easier to study long sequences.