NI TestStand Idea Exchange

Top Authors

User

Kudos

Post an idea

View All (1)

TestStand Expression Macros

Let's say I'm building a fairly long compound expression that has some repeated parameters - I would like a way to specify (without creating additional locals) a variable/macro for use just within that expression.

For example, instead of:

Locals.CommandLine = "cmd /c C:\some path\that\is\reused"
Locals.CommandLine += " /path C:\some path\that\is\reused"

I could specify:

#pathmacro "C:\some path\that\is\reused"
Locals.CommandLine = "cmd /c " + pathmacro
Locals.CommandLine += " /path " + pathmacro

The idea being that with this I only need to update the macros in one place in a long expression.

This is a simple example, but hopefully you can see why this would be useful and why I wouldn't want to create lots of locals when the values are required only within the expression.

View All (2)

If you have lot of code between an if, else, end statement steps (and other flow control structures for, foreach, while, and etc.), it would be nice to roll all that up so you can see more of the flow of the sequence. This will also help to know what steps are in those structures in large sequences. TestStand already has some code folding in the sequence, so this is an expansion of this. Many text and code editors have this feature and it would be a great feature for TestStand.

I was pretty surprised that this isn't already possible or that there wasn't an idea in the ideas exchange for it. The idea is to allow custom step types to embed their 'edit' dialogue into the configuration tab for the step settings. At the moment you have to click a generic 'edit <step type>' button to launch a dialogue.

Instead of:

Have:

This would make custom step types much more user friendly and save unnecessary clicks/steps required to custom and bring the experience of configuring steps more in line with the built-in step types.

I appreciate that it might require a little more effort on the developers part (e.g. posting new values on value change instead of on 'ok'/'cancel') but it could also help to avoid some issues like 'hanging' TestStand when the dialogue is closed and the panel close isn't disabled/handled.

View All (1)

Hi,

Exactly as in subject.

I thought that it will be good if the developers could collapse blocks of code which are in between of the Flow Control or/and Synchronisation step types.

I think about the mechanism we know already from TestStand which hides block of code: i.e. Setup, Main, Cleanup section in the sequence, or it can hide variables. It is a little "+" and little"-" to expand the content of the type of variables.

The types of steps I think of were mainly types from Flow Control and some types from Synchronisation. It would be good if for example we could collapse If-Else-ElseIf-End, Select-End, Case-End, While-End, DoWhile-End, etc statements

I think this functionality could improve the readability of the sequence, and helps the developers to have a better view on the whole sequence.

View All (3)

We in our company are done now several test systems where the best process model is Batch Model. Customers however does not want other reports than UUT report from each test socket. Simple skipping of batch report generation is not possible at the moment particularly now when plug-in structure has arrive for joy of us all. For me this wanted feature is late now because I manage to find out solution, with a great support of local NI team. Finally this feature of easy batch report disabling would serve future generations and today newbies. They will save hundres of hours when they don't have to use try&fail -method to skip those few meaningful steps but just make one selection in report options.

when you click over a flow control statement, for example an if, the content of this statement will be not visible. When you click again over the same statement, the content will be visible again.

Download All

This execution analyser ( an option since it may slow down execution) will analyse the UUTGener executions and recomend user for improving the perfomance.

Few things that i can think of is :

1) If a debug DLL is running which if replaced will improve speed.

2) Check for memory leaks.

3) Generate list of steps which are logged many times ( example in loop which may not be requied to log)

4)List out steps which are taking long time to execute( say top 5)

5)List out steps whose execution time is inconsistent ( varies considerably from execution to execution

These are few of the things that i could think of.There maybe others.

VISA Step Insert for TestStand

The usual Insert Step menu in TestStand:

What the menu might look like with a Insert VISA step:

A VISA>>Write step would replace a LabVIEW Action Step such as the one I used below for direct Instrument control from TestStand. Queries would look similar and be able to set limits on the returned value.

LabVIEW VI for the power supply command to the VISA instrument setup from M&A Explorer.

This is “PS1” in Measurement and Automation Explorer uses Alias Name.

Example of Query instrument to an Agilent 34970A using Alias Name “DM1” setup in MAX.

However, a little more complicated than a single string command from the menu. Might take several Write steps first.

Possible Uses:

Debugging
Instrument control without additional software or programming languages.
Ability to immediately add new instruments and modify existing sequences without an instrument driver. Demonstrates the quickest possible way to gain instrument control with the least effort (for simple systems).
Simple test sequences can be written right away making it easier for technicians or engineers to write tests.
VISA sequence steps can be dragged to the palette and easily re-used.

So we have the setup, main and cleanup step groups in the sequence view which is fine, and they're collapsable which means if you're working in Main you don't get a screenfull of Setup above you.

We also have block sections that you can associate with step types to provide indentations making navigation easier.

What I'd like to see is the ability to create a collapsible section (so a sub sequence call is NOT what I'm talking about).

For times when a sub sequence call is not necessary, we should be able to insert a block section that is collapsable purely for visual appeal.

It makes long sequences easier to navigate. This would be a visual implementation modification on how we show block sections (so collapse versus indent).

Thoughts?

Thanks
Sacha

View All (4)

View All (2)

What do you need our team of experts to assist you with?

Request a quote Find the right product Place an order Get support on a product

How can we help?

Please enter your information below and we'll be intouch soon.

This field is required

Preferred communication method

Email Phone call

What do you need our team of experts to assist you with?

Request a quote Find the right product Place an order Get support on a product

NI TestStand Idea Exchange

Display sequence in a tree structure

TestStand Expression Macros

Add code folding to flow control sections of steps.

Allow embedding of 'Edit' UI into step settings panel for custom step types

Add a "No Comparison" comparison type to the String Value Test

Feature request for sequence file editor: Expand and collapse functionality for every step type which has to have END step type.

Easier way to skip Batch Report Generation in Batch Process Model

Contract / Expand content in a flow control structure

It would be really nice to be able to call LabVIEW functions (primitives) directly from TestStand steps

Provide the ability to be able to logically group and organize sequences within a sequence file (hierarchy)

Change in LabView typedef should be automatically resolved by TestStand

Execution analyser similar to sequence analyser

VISA Step Insert for TestStand

Collapsible (collapsable) sections in the editor sequence view

Ability to remove button on Message Popup and performs other customizations