Bug/Problem with Reply of a Control Refnum of Image display

[Darren · Accepted solution]

Thanks for the added steps... I was able to reproduce the issue, but it looks like a LabVIEW bug. You can reproduce the problem in the LabVIEW editor itself by trying to interactively create an indicator of an Image Display control reference inside a cluster... it won't work:

The DQMH scripting tools are trying to do the same thing programmatically, and obviously it doesn't work there either. My suggestion is that you create the request with a different type of control reference, then after the scripting is done, go manually replace the reference in the Reply Payload argument typedef, and on the connector pane of the Event VI.

I have filed Bug 2367785 on this behavior to LabVIEW R&D, although I have no visibility into how such a bug report will be prioritized.

[Louis.J]

Hi Darren, I found the same issue too but didn't realize they are related. Thanks! But still, there are two problems in the request API vi that cannot be explained by this bug, mainly about some VIs, instead of the indicator, are missing in the diagram: 

(1) The "Obtain Request Events.vi" was not placed at the beginning of the diagram

(2) In the case structure for timeout, several VIs are not placed in the timeout case correctly.

(3) Module not running--error.vi is missing in the error case

They are probably caused by LV bugs too, I am just not sure they are the same bugs as the failure of insertion of indicators you have shown. 

I did all these repairs manually; it looks working fine. It is just alternative way to your suggestion to solve the problem. 

[Louis.J]

Hi, Darren, I found the same issue too but didn't realize they are related. Thanks for the explanation. But there are other missing parts in the public request VI might not be related to this bug because the missing parts are VIs instead of indicators

(1) "Obtain Request Events.vi" is missing at the beginning of the diagram

(2) several VIs are missing in the timeout case

(3) "Module not running-error.vi" is not place in the error case 

These missing parts can be repaired manually and so far, it looks working fine. It might be an alternative solution to your suggested solution. Thanks a lot 

[Darren · Accepted solution]

Yes, the missing parts are a result of the DQMH scripting code erroring out after attempting to create the indicator, and not running downstream scripting code to add all those pieces. 

[Louis.J]

Now it makes sense. Thank you so much!