Assigning Terminals to Controls and Indicators

[Niklasson]

Hello,

With 6 or 8 input/output patterns it is extremely difficult to see difference between particular I/O. This is even more problematic you use for example INT32`s or other data types that have dark color as default.

One gets few pixels of dark blue with black border around it to make things even more difficult.

Suggestion:

- Make an Assigning Terminals mode where the icon with terminals gets enlarged eg. x4 and where all terminals are clearly visible.

- Do not add more black borders, just stick to the data type color.

- Add clear indication which controls and indicators have already their terminals assigned (general information). User by clicking can see which one is assigned to what terminal (as it is now)

Regards

Niklasson

[AristosQueue (NI)]

NI recommends that you refactor your code rather than use the 6x4x4x6 or 8x6x6x8 connector panes. Those dense conpanes are provided because sometimes they are expedient during development, but that doesn't make using them a good idea. In general, a conpane that dense is incomprehensible to users and very hard to maintain the block diagram. When you find yourself needing those conpanes, that is a strong signal that you have poor assignment of responsibility in your function hierarchy, solvable by combining inputs into more coherent blocks of data (clusters or classes).

R&D spending time to facilitate ease-of-use so that you can do something that we recommend you not do would be contradictory.

LabVIEW NXG has taken a different approach to conpane management -- all the terminals are the same size, and you can create extremely large subVI nodes to accommodate all the inputs/outputs. There again, going that large is not recommended.

[Niklasson]

1. I use them as a standard shape so that all the error wires and class references are on the same level and straight. Just because I use them does not mean I need all the inputs/outputs.

2. The are in the LabView to be used, if NI does not want them to be used - remove them. Adding them to the environment and than writing "don`t use it" - that is in my book definition of a contradiction.

3. If similar function is  available in NXG then maybe they mean it to be used after all? Or are we all wrong?

[wiebe@CARYA]

Maybe there should be an option do disable it, just for people who want to use it?

[AristosQueue (NI)]

> 2. The are in the LabView to be used, if NI does not want them to be

> used - remove them. Adding them to the environment and than writing

> "don`t use it" - that is in my book definition of a contradiction.

I said we don't recommend using them; I did not say to not use them. There are plenty of features in LV that have their place but can be abused through overuse or use in wrong context. Use them sparingly... and rare enough that working on making them easier to use isn't a worthwhile investment for you or us.

Please read what I wrote earlier about NXG.

[Darren]

Duplicate of https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW-Idea-Exchange/Connector-Pane-Editor/idi-p/1211569