NI TestStand Idea Exchange

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

I upgraded from TestStand 2019 SP1 to TestStand 2024 Q4 and the UI looks really bad, with black and white theme with icons not recognizable and hard to look at for longer periods.

1) Please add function to have themes for TestStand like Visual Studio, some examples:
Dark theme
Classic theme (Older version of TestStand)

2) Make it easier for users to change the UI and function to zoom in/out in TestStand (like it´s possible in newer versions of LabView).

Iam thinking about expressions field should have zoom in/out function.

 

3) Change it back how it was for showing Sequences and Variables (TestStand).
It´s not better to show only one or the other. I would like both to be shown at the same time as it was in previous TestStand versions.

I just switched from TS2019 to TS2023. I am not finding a way to configure the TS editor, witch is a hard to orientate flash of white and black screen. The color separation of the different panes, icons, step colors, fields  and  menues is not given and there are no clearly visible frames distinguished by backcolors. Working with this new GUI is tedious and not suitable, not suporting a rapid development idea. The attention of development shold be by the code and not by  the absorbing search and brain consuming editor.  How can I use the old 2019 condition gain? Could you please change this in the NEXT Teststand version?

I think it can a be a really good idea to review and give feedback on all Idea exchange.

 

You ask us to give feedback but you don't finish the loop.

 

Some idea are mark as new for many years now...

      I am currently working on a project using the Teststand software's seq editor. This project has many steps, with nearly 3000 steps. During my seq editing and debugging process, sometimes I need to repeatedly jump in different sections and change some parameters. Oh my God, quickly finding a step between so many steps is driving me crazy, and I feel like my life is getting dark.

      So I was thinking, why can't Teststand add a serial number display to the left of the seq edit box? This way, whether I am positioning a certain step or telling my colleagues which line needs to be changed, I simply need to obtain or convey a line number information. I believe that adding this information to an editing form is not particularly difficult.

      Why not make it better to use?

      Brothers, it's already 2023. Are you willing to continue enduring this pain?

TestStand File Diff and Merge Utility is not very useful for code reviews on its own.  It seems adequate for notifying the user that a sequence was added, however from the tool itself the user cannot actually review the newly added or removed sequence's contents.  Why is there no + on the item tree to go deeper.

 

Alternatively:

If I have to right-click a sequence and select "Go to location" then why bother with the separate tool to begin with?  Why isn't the diff utility integrated into TestStand's sequence editor itself?  Seems like a side-by-side comparison within Sequence Editor would allow a reviewer to poke and prod around all the hidden settings that are often missed using the existing utility.

 

TestStand File Diff and Merge Utility has the ability to produce reports in XML format with a slew of dependencies on TestStand (stylesheets, button images, etc.) making them not very portable.  Yes, I know they can be packaged with the extra utility, but that's a hassle too.  Now instead of managing a file I have to manage a folder of files.

 

Additionally, these reports only seem to work with Internet Explorer which I'm hearing is going away. Not sure if it's just me, but Edge's IE mode doesn't seem to work for these reports either.

 

Can NI do something to address this?

  • Make a browser extension that works with at least chromium based browsers.
  • Figure out a nice PDF format.

 

Ideally, I want to upload the file type into my code review platform of choice (git, perforce swarm, crucible, network folder share, etc.) and not require my reviewer to have TestStand installed on their machine.

Hi

In the TestStand report generator it's possible to show/plot graphs within the report.
Unfortunatelly it's not possible to add axis labels to the graphs.
In my opinion this is a must because a graph without knowing the units of x, y axis is a useless graph.
It would be awesome if this feature could be implemented.

Many thanks
Best regards


Kevin2022-05-31_14h58_03.png

It would be nice to have an auto-incrementation option checkbox (like LabVIEW executable version).

 

And addindg the build index would be even better ...

 

hugo_fr_0-1647942208236.png

 

Background

Under the Installer Options tab, there is a button called Advanced Options.... (help linked)and then a section for TestStand Specific Settings. This section allows a user to specify where the configuration files will be located when running the TestStand runtime engine on a deployment machine. See screenshot of help discription and then of the utility below:

Help

TestStand specific settings.PNG

 

 

Screenshot of Deployment Utility Section

Deployment Utility Advanced Options.png

 

Recommended Change to Documentation

When looking at the help documentation, it does not detail what each of the possible destination directories are pointing to. However, if we move to the Distribution Files tab section of the help, there is a detailed list. See this example link here https://www.ni.com/docs/en-US/bundle/teststand-api-reference/page/tsref/installation-destination-options-distributed.html

 

I recommend making a quick link to this same page to clarify the directories that can be specified for Cfg files.

For a mile long sequence, it would be nice to have a filter.

For example, I want to see only "Message Pop" steps, so I can eliminate/skip them to automate the sequence; or I want to skip all the subsequence calls for the first run after I made a lot of changes.

 

I know there is a distinct icon for each step type.  But for a long sequence, it's hard to catch all the steps I want to change.

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

You can run TestStand sequences headless currently from LabVIEW, but it would be nice to have more detailed documentation and examples on how to do it properly since it is not straightforward.  There are some end users that do not need to see the TestStand execution in the operator interface and just want to run a sequence without showing all of the TestStand UI components.

There is rudimentary Command Line Interface (CLI) integration in the TestStand Deployment utility.  Its undocumented, and is one flag.  "build".  Which is useful, but the fact that my only option to determine if the build succeeded is manually parse the build output log is cumbersome and error prone.

 

In a world where continuous automation and build automation are becoming daily buzzwords, additions to the CLI are sorely missing.

 

I don't necessarily need to be able to do much from the CLI, but having control and the ability to read back status on a build would be tremendous.

 

https://forums.ni.com/t5/NI-TestStand/Running-the-deployment-utility-from-the-command-line/td-p/1624948

The TestStand API doesn't provide a simple, robust mechanism allowing developers to programatically run sequences outside of the ActiveX UIs.

 

On many an occasion I've wanted to wrap the following basic functionality:

  • Run a specific sequence file (with or without a [typically custom] process model)
  • Wait for it to complete.
  • Retrieve the result.

It's something I've needed to do in all of the following situations:

  • Integrating into a customer's existing framework
  • Integrating into my own automated test framework
  • Providing a simple API to a customer
  • Creating customized UIs that rely on UI messages and events rather than the ActiveX Controls

The solution I've ended up defaulting to in the past has been some variation on:

  • Start with the full-featured C# UI.
  • Scrape out all visible ActiveX Controls, and hide the window so that it's running in the background.
  • Integrate a TCP/IP (or equivalent) client into the application that has the ability to listen for requests and then implement them through the AxApplicationMgr.
  • Build a TCP/IP server assembly that launches the client application and exposes the necessary API for simple interactions.

The approach above is time-consuming, error-prone, and feels like a hack -- but given that TestStand does not expose any easy mechanism for simply running a sequence, this is what I've ended up having to resort to.

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.

Hello,

Many SW-Tool providers have realized that how comfortable it is for a programmeruser to work with dark backgrounds. Microsoft did it in 2013 for visual studio and now browser companies are doing the same. Unfortunately, I can Change background color of MAX and TestStand. This makes longer working painful for eyes.

 

An example of such a bakground is attached with the message.

 

Such a feature will improve ergonomics.

 

Thank you

Regards

Ricky

Hi,

There is a LabVIEW Champion title... so why not a TestStand Champion title ?!

I think it would make a lot of sense !

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

 

 

 

right now with TestStand Sequence Analyzer utility, it is limited to analyzing a whole sequence file at once (or as much of it as you analyze before you hit the stop button).

However, if I have a long sequence file this can take quite a while, and I don't really want to wait.

Add a feature where I can select areas to analyze and have sequence analyzer just analyze those areas (for example -- select a few (sub)sequences in my sequence file, or a few steps within a sequence).  This way I can limit the area of my analysis to where I know I made changes (or where I know my biggest problems are) and focus on those and not waste time analyzing everything else. 

The Search Directories.Insert method should only insert the directory if it is not already there.

 

The Method includes an index argument, if the directory is already there, then it should move the existing directory to the requested index.

 

While we were working on the shipping examples for DQMH, we discovered that the insert method was creating duplicates every time it was called. We implemented a work around that includes a for loop to check each of the items in the search directories list to see if it is the directory we are trying to insert, if it is, we delete it. Once the for loop ends, then we insert the directory where we want it.

 

You can see a video of the issue and how we worked around it here: DQMH 3.1 Only inserts the Delacor examples directory into Search Directories once