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

Find yourself placing a Sequence Call step and trying to determine the appropriate value to enter for a numeric parameter called "Direction"?  Tired of creating sequences with numeric parameters named like the following: "Direction_0_Up_1_Down_2_Left_3_Right"?

 

The solution is to support the creation of variables with enumerated type within TestStand.  Enums could be created as custom variables and then used as wherever a self-documenting variable is required.

 

 

Enum type creation:

 24440i0A04C051A35273A4

 

 

 

As seen from a Sequence Call step to a subsequence that uses an Enum as a parameter: 

 

24442i5CDD825A78B161E5

 

Why not make it possible for Teststand to generate reports in PDF format?

It would make it a lot easier to send a testreport of a specific board to people not connected to the actual tester.

 

Today we use XML but this requires the stylesheet to be present on the readers pc.

Graphs are also not showing correct unless you do a manual setup of the settings in Internet Explore.

 

PDF would make my life a lot simpler

 

/Michael

 

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 think it would be a great idea to allow the sequence adapter to expand containers like the CVI and LabVIEW adapters do when you are editing the module for the step. 

 

 

See attachment.

The current placement creates confusion about what you’re actually closing out of when you click it. It makes me hesitate and wonder what I am about to close. 

 

If you click it when there are multiple files open, it just closes out of the tab on top. If you click it when there is only one file open, it closes out of the whole pane, including the Sequences and Variables windows.

 

TestStandX.png

 

It would eliminate any ambiguity if the X for each file were on the tab for that file and if there were a separate X for the pane, like you typically see in tabbed programs.

 

You could also just put an X next to the pin on each little window instead, like the X in the Step Settings pane and the Insertion Palette in the screenshot above. 

Almost all of our analog measurements are specified in %: example

 

a Power Supply DMM measurement limit is 24.00Vdc +/- 5%

 

We typically have 100+ measurements like this in a project

 

 

Why not include it in the default step types as an optional selection?

I sure would use it, so would my team.

 

I agree that it should not alter existing programs using the default step, but I believe that this feature should have been in Teststand when it was first released.

 

I have run across this in both analog measurements, and the results from an ADC

Think a limit of 0x234 +3%, -7%

 

 

How many times have you found yourself typing double backslashes "C:\\Windows\\System32\\cmd.exe" or even worse, going through a copied path to change every backslash to a double backslash (and inevitably missing one), just so you can pass a file or directory as a constant to a code module or another sequence?

 

string issue.png

 

I'd like to see a symbol for 'explicit string' in the TestStand expression language, much like C# does with the @ symbol.

So if we typed @"C:\windows\temp" we would actually get the string "C:\Windows\temp" instead of "C:\Windows<tab>emp".

 

To really go the extra mile on this:

  • Drag and drop could be enabled, so that any file dragged from another window into an expression box would automatically paste the filename.
  • A browse button could be added to the expression browse dialog which would bring up the usual file open dialog and insert the selected filename.
Message Edited by Josh W on 06-14-2010 12:57 PM
Message Edited by Josh W on 06-14-2010 12:58 PM

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?

I'm taking a bunch of steps and trying to put a "If" flow control step around them. 

Kinda like this:

TS_StartIf.png

 

But what I end up with is just a If/End statement in the middle of the steps that I selected (well, after the first step in the selection)

 

TS_ResultsIf.png

 

What I would have liked to see is this:

 

TS_wantedIf.png

 

Whare the If/End wraps the steps that I selected.

I don't quite know how best to handle the situation where the steps you have selected are not sequential (there's an unselected step in the middle), but that could probably just behave how it is now.

 

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

It would be nice if the Step Settings for a Sequence Call step's Module tab would also list the calling sequences comments field and the parameter comments in addition to the prototype information. This would allow sequence calls to easily present information on the expected use of the sequence, along with parameter information (ranges, default options, etc) that would be useful to the developer. I've created a simple mockup of what I'd like to see here:

 

19657iFA3E1FCBE0E24E08

 

By adding these features, sequences can contain their own 'help' information which would allow the developer to configure the call without having to leave the step module dialog.

 

Thanks,

 

-Jack

For some reason I was certain this was already in the idea exchange, but I couldn't find it -- so I'll post it.

 

Select Case structures are frustratingly difficult to use if you want one case to support multiple values.

 

In text languages you can often do something like

 

Switch (Foo) {

Case 1:

execute this code;

Case 2:

execute this code;

Case 3:

Case 4:

Case 5:

execute this code;

Case 6:

execute this code;

Default:

execute this code;

}

 

Notice that the case for 3,4,5 is all the same, and I just need to put it in place once.

TestStand can't do this.  You need to do something like this:

how to do select case on multiple values

which is horribly difficult to write, maintain, and understand what is happening.  It would be MUCH easier if select case on multiple values worked like this:

SelectCaseImplementA.png

where it looks just like other text based languages, although it takes up quite a bit of realestate on the screen.

or maybe something like this:

SelectCaseImplementB.png

where I can just type in a comma separated list of allowed values.  The similarity with text based languages disappears here, but it is much smaller on screen (but notice how it shows nicely in the description field) and lines up better with LabVIEW notation.

 

 

Note: LabVIEW already supports doing this, and also supports ranges of values (eg 3, 5..10, 12 for numerics) which would also be nice, and also supports case sensitive and insensitive comparison for cases. 

This idea mostly goes along with this idea.  I use type def all the time in LabVIEW, especially with enums.  TestStand can interact with my VIs with enums, but they are handled as a number.  Furthermore, if the enum gets changed, the wrong value of the enum is often used.  I really like the idea of custom data type of an enum.  The ultimate would be if I only had to alter the enum once (in ctl file) and TestStand would automatically update its data type.  This should be the same for clusters.

When creating custom step types, it is highly recommended to use Post-Step for calling execution module instead of Default Module.

Thus, when instanciating a custom step type, parameters passing is not saved within the sequence but only in the step type definition.

This allows to change parameters passing without having to update all the step types instances.

 

In some big test benches, it is intersesting to have low-level step types and high step types based on low level step types.

High level step types execution modules are sequences using low level step types.

 

Since sequence adapter is not available for Post-Step, we are obliged to call the sequence through Default Module.

Thus it can generate problems when adding parameters in sequence call.

 

I suggess to allow Sequence Call in SubStep creation :

 

SequenceAdapterInPostStep.png

 

Jean-Louis Schricke, MESULOG

TestStand Architect

Often working with Full Featured UI and Simple UI codes to create custom interfaces for TS, I noticed that the versions shipped with LV2012 are full of deprecated functions.

Also, most of their implementation go against good LV coding rules.

 

Re-writing them could be a great idea !

The built-in Wait step currently causes TestStand to simply stop at that step until the specified period has elapsed. For steps longer than a few seconds, it would be nice to have some sort of indicator to show how much time is left to wait (and to show that the computer hasn't locked up on those waits that are more than 15 seconds).

 

It would be really nice to have a check box option to show some sort of wait indicator, even if it was simply using the progress indicator in the lower right corner of the screen (something that simple could even just always be enabled).

 

On a related note, could the progress bar be made wider so that there is more resolution as to how much progress has been made? If there was a ten minute wait for something, the bar would be moving very slowly and hard to tell progression was being made.

I have noticed that the TestStand shipping examples are often overlooked when looking for ways to accomplish things with TestStand.  This is not the case (as much) in LabVIEW and CVI, and I feel that this is because TestStand does not have an example finder.  I would like to see some method of accessing the shipping examples through the sequence editor environment, such as:

 

1-1.png

Another problem with the current setup is that the only way to know what the example demonstrates is the name of the folder.  This makes it easy to overlook examples that would be helpful. 

 

I propose adding a TestStand example finder with these features (in order of importance):

 

  • Provide a description for each example (most of this info can be pulled from the sequenceFileLoad callback dialogs in a lot of the examples)
  • have keywords for the examples, and allow searching
  • for more advanced examples, provide a batch file to load all necessary components 
  • Provide links to the NI community and developer zone to encourage participation

Currently, when you rename a variable, you have to rename all the places where you are using the variable manually. It would be helpful to have a "smart rename" option which, after renaming the variable will update its uses.

 

smart_rename.png

Handling arrays in TestStand is pretty limiting and more often that not you have to pop into a code module to perform any sort of array handling.

The following is the default functions that can be used in expressions:

[Array
GetArrayBounds(array, lower, upper) Retrieves the upper and lower bounds of an array.
GetNumElements(array) Returns the number of elements in an array.
InsertElements(array, index, numElements) Inserts new elements into a one-dimensional array.
RemoveElements(array, index, numElements) Removes elements from a one-dimensional array.
SetArrayBounds(array, lower, upper) Changes the bounds of an array.
SetNumElements(array, numElements) Sets the number of elements in a one-dimensional array.

]

 

 

I would like to see this expanded to avoided have to resort to using code module.
The following is some suggestion:


Array Subset function
Array Max & Min
Replace Array Subset function
Search 1D Array
Sort 1D Array

 

 

regards

Ray Farmer

I've encountered on several occassions, especially with complex testing, customers who are frustrated by the inherent 'flicker' that happens when stepping into and out of subsequences of logic. This leads to people opting to not use sub sequences, or creating complex replacements for the execution view that has a more persistant way of presenting the executed step data.

 

I'd like to see an optional setting for execution viewing that allows for sub sequences to be shown as expandable nodes (perhaps defaulted to 'collapsed') so that low level test operators can see the overview results at the sequence-call level, but so advanced users can expand for details if they're interested without added pulldowns or tabs for additional information.  this could be one more API property similiar to showing one-stepgroup or showing all, so that developers can chose whether to be more efficient, or display-heavy....

 

expanded results on sequenceView

 

In scenarios with dynamic sequence loading, the display might simply show a 'no pre-loading possible' sort of message until the execution actually gets to that portion of the sequence.

 

Cheers, 

 

Elaine R.