![]() |
Nov 8 2007, 11:55 AM
Post
#1
|
|
![]() Very Active Premium Member ![]() Posts: 100 Joined: 26-October 04 From: Weert Member No.: 906 Using LabVIEW Since:1997 LV:8.20 ,8.0.1 ,7.1.1
|
Hi guys,
I have the habit of always labeling my shiftregs on the left hand side of the loop they're on. I use free labels for that, but it would be nice if the labels where (optionaly) automatically created (like with objects on the FP). They would be attached to the shiftreg, moving with it when the shiftreg is moved up or down. besides being a handy feature for myself, it would probably also encourage others who don't label their shiftregs now to do it anyway, because it would be the next logical (more or less forced) step after creating the register. What do you guys think? -------------------- Greetings, Jeffrey
NI CLA & VIT Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
| Ad |
Nov 8 2007, 11:55 AM
Post
#
|
|
|
Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2007, 04:41 PM
Post
#2
|
|
![]() Extwemely Active Premium Member ![]() Posts: 1570 Joined: 23-January 05 From: Here Member No.: 1431 Using LabVIEW Since:2003 LV:7.0 ,7.1 ,.
|
Definitely a good idea. Sounds like a visit to NI's product suggestion center is in order.
To reduce the number of wires, you can also use a single cluster for all the data. See a recent discussion here. -------------------- More than meets the eye...
Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2007, 08:22 PM
Post
#3
|
|
![]() Very Active Premium Member ![]() Posts: 100 Joined: 26-October 04 From: Weert Member No.: 906 Using LabVIEW Since:1997 LV:8.20 ,8.0.1 ,7.1.1
|
Definitely a good idea. Sounds like a visit to NI's product suggestion center is in order. To reduce the number of wires, you can also use a single cluster for all the data. See a recent discussion here. Yes of course.. But for simple (lv2-style) sub-vi's where you know not much will change later on, it's still convenient to just use a shift reg or two-three.. I'll enter it in the product suggestion center... -------------------- Greetings, Jeffrey
NI CLA & VIT Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2007, 09:06 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Very Active Member Posts: 143 Joined: 26-September 05 From: Zurich Member No.: 3076 Using LabVIEW Since:2006 LV:8.2.1 ,8.20 ,6.1
|
Hi guys, I have the habit of always labeling my shiftregs on the left hand side of the loop they're on. I use free labels for that, but it would be nice if the labels where (optionaly) automatically created (like with objects on the FP). They would be attached to the shiftreg, moving with it when the shiftreg is moved up or down. besides being a handy feature for myself, it would probably also encourage others who don't label their shiftregs now to do it anyway, because it would be the next logical (more or less forced) step after creating the register. What do you guys think? Yup, sounds like good idea with solid reasoning. I look forward to this in future versions...... Thanks Shane. Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Nov 8 2007, 10:15 PM
Post
#5
|
|
![]() Very Active Member Posts: 50 Joined: 17-December 04 Member No.: 1255 Using LabVIEW Since:1993 LV:8.20 ,7.1 ,8.0.1
|
Hi guys, I have the habit of always labeling my shiftregs on the left hand side of the loop they're on. I use free labels for that, but it would be nice if the labels where (optionaly) automatically created (like with objects on the FP). They would be attached to the shiftreg, moving with it when the shiftreg is moved up or down. besides being a handy feature for myself, it would probably also encourage others who don't label their shiftregs now to do it anyway, because it would be the next logical (more or less forced) step after creating the register. What do you guys think? I think it's a great idea. I used to put it in the suggestion box about every version, but lately it slipped off my radar. I would also suggest built-in lables for Sequence-Locals. (Not that I would ever use a Sequence Local!) It seems obvious to me. NI pushes for programming standards, including good documentation, but this obvious feature remains missing. Cheers, Dave T. -------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------
David Thomson Original Code Consulting www.originalcode.com National Instruments Alliance Program Member Certified LabVIEW Architect Certified Instrument Driver Developer ------------------------------------------------------------- Senior Scientist, Droplet Measurement Technologies Boulder, Colorado ------------------------------------------------------------- There are 10 kinds of people: those who understand binary, and those who don't. {{LabVIEW Champion}} Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Nov 14 2007, 12:09 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Very Active Member Posts: 59 Joined: 1-June 06 Member No.: 5178 Using LabVIEW Since:2006 LV:7.0 ,7.0 ,.
|
Hi
Today i have creat a small tool that can perhapse help you . This tool place a name in description attribut for wire that you before select on diagram. First step: Please place the "Give name to wire.vi" in your labview\project folder and restart labview. Second step Open Vi and select one Wire and make Tools\Give name to wire.vi If all is correct, this Vi promt you for give name to this wire. Last step Place mouse in wire and show it name in contextual help. Nota : have use CCT_Get User App Reference__CCT.vi part of the Code Capture Tool and is covered by the BSD license (see code reposary of lavag) Eric
Attached File(s)
Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Nov 14 2007, 06:44 AM
Post
#7
|
|
![]() CCT It Premium Member ![]() Posts: 1271 Joined: 13-June 05 From: Woerden, Netherlands Member No.: 2399 Using LabVIEW Since:2001 LV:8.5.1 ,6.1 ,8.2.1
My Blog
My Gallery
|
Open Vi and select one Wire and make Tools\Give name to wire.vi If all is correct, this Vi promt you for give name to this wire. Last step Place mouse in wire and show it name in contextual help. Nota : have use CCT_Get User App Reference__CCT.vi part of the Code Capture Tool and is covered by the BSD license (see code reposary of lavag) Eric One question, how is this faster than right click->description? Ton (good to see you use the CCT -------------------- Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Nov 14 2007, 09:05 AM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Very Active Member Posts: 59 Joined: 1-June 06 Member No.: 5178 Using LabVIEW Since:2006 LV:7.0 ,7.0 ,.
|
One question, how is this faster than right click->description? Ton (good to see you use the CCT Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Jan 31 2008, 02:53 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
I want a LabVIEW icon under my name! Member Posts: 3 Joined: 20-June 07 Member No.: 8766 Using LabVIEW Since:2000 LV:8.20 ,7.1 ,6.0
|
I agree, it would be usefull to add a comparable feature for local variables of stacked sequence .
Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Jan 31 2008, 04:56 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Very Active Member Posts: 90 Joined: 7-March 07 From: Munich Member No.: 7932 Using LabVIEW Since:2001 LV:8.6 ,8.5.1 ,7.1.1
|
I agree, it would be usefull to add a comparable feature for local variables of stacked sequence . I don't agree with this latest addition. There are virtually no reasons to use any stacked sequences in a well-designed LabVIEW application. There are even fewer reasons to use sequence locals. I don't think NI should invest any extra development time in a feature that only supports bad programming style. Sorry for the harsh words, but I had to go through my share of stacked-sequence-applications, and I didn't find one stacked sequence which could not have been replaced using other features, like sub-VIs. In all cases, this would have improved readability of the code a lot! -------------------- The saddest aspect of life right now is that science gathers knowledge faster than society gathers wisdom.
Isaac Asimov Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Jan 31 2008, 05:31 PM
Post
#11
|
|
![]() I'm a LAVA, not a fighter. V I Engineering, Inc. ![]() Posts: 3500 Joined: 13-October 03 From: Michigan, USA Member No.: 181 Using LabVIEW Since:1993 LV:8.5 ,. ,.
My Blog
|
There are virtually no reasons to use any stacked sequences in a well-designed LabVIEW application. This is an arguement that we've had before, so let me cut to the chase: There are few reasons to use any stacked sequences in a well-designed LabVIEW application. Like all rules, there are exceptions. There are cases where you need to force dataflow where it doesn't currently exist, and encapsulating code in a subVI or a flat sequence structure can be equally appropriate. Like all programming paradigms, it's all about using the right tool for the job. -------------------- ![]() Tags
This content has not been tagged yet
|
|
|
|
Similar Topics
| Topic Title | Replies | Topic Starter | Views | Last Action | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
5 | anton.lindner | 1244 | 18th January 2005 - 01:31 PM Last post by: anton.lindner |
|||
![]() |
2 | bekrul | 899 | 21st March 2005 - 10:38 PM Last post by: bekrul |
|||
![]() |
10 | Barrie | 3188 | 27th July 2006 - 10:55 PM Last post by: Ami |
|||
![]() |
9 | Phil Duncan | 1223 | 24th May 2007 - 09:32 AM Last post by: JFM |
|||
![]() ![]() |
| Time is now: 7th September 2008 - 07:05 PM |