NI TestStand Idea Exchange

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

When user opens the Offline Processing Utility and at the same time starts to type on the keyboard the user can accidently rename the profile.

(Attached a screen-recording to visualize)

It would be great if there was no selected row or column when starting/opening ORPU. The renaming of the profile disturbs the production since the database logging will not work as expected.

 

When we start ORPU we already have the '/tray' enabled but somehow its still possible to accidently rename the Profile.

My team uses Analyzer Rules to enforce best practices for developers across sequence files and workspaces with great results.  However we would love to be able to also provide rule checking and warnings for developers on some basic *.tsd file content  such as Installer Name field, and build-path & installation-path/image-path, etc...  New (or rusty!) developers often miss steps in their configuration and needlessly struggle with badly behaving deployments.

As TSD files do not appear to have an API available from TestStand at this time nor conform to  a json/xml syntax internally, for easy parsing via 3rd party tools, some method(s) for 'reading' file (or converting to readable syntax) may also be required in order to build rules effectively?

Hi all,

 

wouldn't be really nice if one could copy and paste step properties?

  1. copy each property idividually...OR
  2. copy selected properties....OR
  3. copy ALL properties (well, like #2 but select all...haha...oops...yes)

T999_0-1694113001941.png

 

 

Hi folks,

 

When writing TestStand UI components using LabVIEW, there are a lot of scenarios where using a callback VI to handle a TestStand event is the right move. As of writing this, that's the only way.

 

There have also been plenty of times when I would have preferred to handle a TestStand event directly within a LabVIEW event structure. In these kinds of scenarios my code would be less complicated if we had the ability to directly register TestStand engine events with LabVIEW's "Register for Events" node.

 

Years ago when learning TestStand, I tried to do this out of intuition and I was kind of surprised that it wasn't supported.

 

Below is an illustration of what I'm proposing.

 

TestStandDynamicEvents.png

Since TestStand 2019, it's possible to configure an action step with a LabVIEW Module to switch between using a source VI and using the same one but compiled into a LabVIEW Packed Project Library (PPL).

The option, accessible in two ways, is called "Always run VI in Packed Project Library".

 

That's a neat possibility since it's allow to switch between a development version with easy debugging of a classical VI, and an optimized and locked production version with PPL.
One non compiled VI
One compiled VI into a PPL
One LabVIEW project
One TestStand step

 

However, when LabVIEW Adapter is set to Run-Time, a tight coupling between the compiled VI and the non-compiled VI is maintained for no reason.

 

Example 1)
-A VI is developed and compiled on a development machine A
-It is called as the module of an action step
-The VI, the PPL, the .lvproj and the .seq are pasted on a production machine B with fresh installations of LabVIEW and TestStand
-LabVIEW Adapter set to Run-Time on machine B
-Always run VI in Packed Project Library set on machine B
--> The execution will not start, since the classical error -17600 appears on the call. The reason is because the LabVIEW cache of the machine B does not contains data from the .lvproj. Simply opening then closing the .lvproj updates the LV cache, which solves the issue. However, it makes no sense to depend of the LabVIEW development environment on this production machine since the LabVIEW Adapter is set to Run-Time and "Always run VI in Packed Project Library" is enabled.

 

Example 2)
-LabVIEW Adapter set to Run-Time
-Always run VI in Packed Project Library
--> If source VI is deleted, it takes a long time to preload the modules. See here

 

Proposition :
When the LabVIEW Adapter is set to Run-Time and "Always run VI in Packed Project Library" is enabled, it should be possible :
- To not install the LabVIEW development environment (only the LV Run-Time)
- To keep only the PPL (and eventually the .lvproj) and to delete the source VI (no source code on production machine)

It would be nice to have an Auto-populating folder option for TestStand projects much the same way that LabVIEW project do.  

 

Folders added to TestStand projects are snapshots of the folder's contents when added.  Any files added to the folder on disk afterwards are not marked for inclusion with the deployment at analysis time.  This behavior is fine as a default.

 

However, there are times when you do want to automatically include all files in a folder.  Having an auto-populating folder option would mark the folder and all its contents for inclusion automatically with the deployment at analysis time.  After analysis is over the user could still choose to uncheck any files they wish before selecting the build button.

 

From version to version, it's only natural that developers will be adding new files to established folders.  Since the TestStand project doesn't aid in development activities, it's easy for folks to forget to add files while they're developing.  We often have a faulty build or two with each release because necessary files aren't making it into the build.  We ultimately have to delete the folders in the project and re-add them, then go through the hassle of fixing the paths and included files. An auto-populating folder option that integrates with the build utility would save us time and headaches.

 

Currently, if you have LabVIEW code modules that use maps or sets you have to use something like an Action Engine to interact with the map, you cannot pass a map from LabVIEW into TestStand and vice-versa.

 

Maps are an incredibly useful data structure and having support for them natively in TestStand would be very helpful, not just for LabVIEW but also due to how prevalent maps (dictionaries) are used in Python as well.

 

JorrEl_0-1674075180101.png

 

Add feature to allow commands and sequences created in Tools->Customize->Customize Tool Menu->Add Tools Menu Item.
When customer creates a command or sequence in this section he would like to put it in the toolbar for quick access , TestTand does not allow this task. TestStand allows the toolbar customization for items that are TS native basically

Hi,

 

it can be a simple and stupid question, but I don’t get why, when I define a container as a parameter of a sequence called in the main sequence. That parameter can’ be expanded to fill the different field with the variables that I need. I created also custom type variable for trying to achieve this aim but nothing. I thing that passing a container as parameter can be helpful in particular when you need to pass a lot of variables regarding the same “object".

 

Best Regards,

Zuc

Download All

I was debugging on a test station and had several watch expressions.

When I came in this morning they were all gone, someone else used that station and deleted them.

 

I think it would be good to be able to save the expressions in a file and be able to load them.

An additional feature would be the ability to load them from a sequence step.

Adding the same option as installer advanced options to lock the Labview Packaged Library Version to the Deployment file Version

 

hugo_fr_0-1647943596741.png

 

I would like to ask to add named types support for TestStand array literals. The current behavior is described as follows:

 

Declares a one-dimensional array of numbers, strings, Boolean values, object references, or containers. If all elements are of the same type, the result array is an array of elements of that type. If all elements are not of the same type, the result array is an array of containers.

I would like it to be more or less like this:

Declares a one-dimensional array of numbers, strings, Boolean values, object references, containers, or named type. If all elements are of the same type, the result array is an array of elements of that type. If all elements are not of the same type, the result array is an array of containers.

The problem with the current implementation can be seen on the screen.

 

Issue.png

It is not a bug (BUG 1828580 to be more precise), it is a feature.

If I call a python function within the TestStand Python adapter the arguments for the functions must be according the order of the function which isn't Python like. This means the order of the arguments in TestStand must be exactly the same as in the Python function, the name of the argument is ignored.
It would be really nice if the TestStand Python adapter would support Keyword Arguments as well.

https://www.scaler.com/topics/python/types-of-function-arguments-in-python/

keyword_arguments4.png

Currently, there is no unambiguous solution for passing empty Array of X (where X is a different type than 64-bit Floating Point) as a sequence parameter. If we use {} it is assumed to be of type 64-bit Floating Point. To have an empty Array of Strings we can use ambigues Split("",""). I have no idea how to pass e.g. empty Array of Signed 64-bit Integer without creating empty variables.

 

It would useful to have Empty Array Literals of a particular type e.g.:

{} - default

{}i64 - for Signed 64-bit Integer

{}ui64 - for Unsigned 64-bit Integer

{}s - for String

{}b - for Boolean

{}r - for Object Reference

{}c - for Container

{}TYPE_NAME - for type definition where TYPE_NAME is type definition name; e.g. Path.

I would like to be able to use multiline comments in Sequences. Something like step comment would be enough IMHO. See screens below.

 

As you may see on figure 2, current solution make comment difficult to understand.

 

Fig. 1. Sequence multiline comment fieldFig. 1. Sequence multiline comment field

 

Fig. 2. How multiline comment is displayed in Sequence stepFig. 2. How multiline comment is displayed in Sequence step

 

Fig. 3. Step multiline comment (shortened)Fig. 3. Step multiline comment (shortened)

 

Fig. 4. Step multiline comment (full text)Fig. 4. Step multiline comment (full text)

The fact that TestStand has now a Python adapter is just amazing.
One thing I'm currently missing is the dict or json datatype which can be used to transfer bigger property data between the python script and TS.
Currently tuple is supported but is limited especially if you have a array property with container in it.

To import/export properties in TestStand the JSON format would be much more intuitive than the proprietary CSV format.
It would also better fit to the structur of the TestStands property structur.

Hello,

 

CSV Input Stream allow to parse CSV files to input data into a Stream Loop for instance. By default, the separator is a comma (,). I use a non english version of Excel to edit a CSV file, and every CSV format write a semi-colon as separator (;):

A;0;0;2
A;10;30000;5
A;20;15;7
B;75;42;1
B;100;12;0

 

Using an expression, I am able to dynamically (at run-time) change the property SeparatorChar:

Locals.MyInputStream.AsCsvFileInputRecordStream.SeparatorChar = ";"

 

I think it could be more convenient to have a direct access to this parameter in the configuration pane, allowing also to check the content of the file  before execution with Parse Record Prototype funtions.

 

Best regards,

When assigning a type to a property, the list of types is in an unordered pile. In the next release, can someone please alphabetize it?

 

(PS. Do not ask about the context of this image. It's not pretty. 😏 )

 

PileOTypes.png