Connection aux symboles graphiques

[StephR]

Je trouve que la lecture d'un VI mal construit est très difficile car les fils (flux) ne partent pas visuellement du connecter.

Exemple simple:

Les deux fils sont bien évidemment connectés à gauche mais nous avons l'impression qu'ils sont connectés en haut et en bas.

Sur cet exemple, il est évident qu'il faut arranger le schéma mais pour des objets beaucoup plus complexe, c'est beaucoup plus perturbant.

Il faudrait que le fil parte obligatoirement du connecteur.

Merci.

[altenbach]

Your image is broken.

[Mr.Mike]

Altenbach a dit:

  Votre image est cassé

Je ne comprend pas tout votre message sans l'image.

[RavensFan]

Picture or not, I'm pretty sure this idea will get very few votes if it remains in French.

The Ideas should be posted in English to get the widest visibility and chance for support.

Google Translation:

"I find that reading a poorly constructed VI is very difficult because the son (flux) do not leave visually connect.

Simple example:

The two are obviously connected son left, but we feel they are connected at the top and bottom.

In this example, it is clear that the scheme should arrange for objects but much more complex, it is much more disturbing.

 
Should be mandatory to leave the wire connector"

This translation makes absolutely no sense.

[StephR]

Bonsoir,

Voici l'image correspondant à mon 1er message. Désolé.

Pour le français et l'anglais, je ne suis pas sur que mon niveau d'anglais soit plus performant que Google traduction donc je m'abstiens.

[Mr.Mike]

Idea Translation:

I think that reading a poorly constructed VI is very difficult becuse the wires don't appear to connect [in the right spots]
Simple example:
(image)
The two wires are evidently connected on the left [of the Equal? node] but it seems they're connected [to it] above and below.
In this example, it's evident that [it must be connected to the left side of the node] but for more complex objects, it's more annoying.

Wires should be required to separate at their connection. 

His response:

Hello,

Here's the image corresponding to my first post.  Sorry.

(image)

With regards to French and English, I'm not sure my level of English is good better than Google translation, so I don't abstain [from using it]

[RavensFan]

That translation is much better.

I don't see where the idea is here.  Right-click clean up wires or running the code cleanup tool fixes the problems this image shows.

[altenbach]

I think the point of the idea is to avoid confusion because often connected wires are partially hidden below the function or even overlap each other. In these cases it is not possible to tell what's connected where, leading to confusion and errors.

It might be good if LabVIEW could automatically do a micro-cleanup near function terminals to make the layout visually understandable. This could be done for example if the wires would e.g. have a weak repelling force.

[dthor]

Personally I make it so that a wire is always *exactly* on its connection point, with no wire bends behind the node, and coming out from the proper direction. This Idea, and altenbach's suggestion, would reduce the need for my obsessive behavior.

I'd post an image but my LabVIEW computer is broken right now. 

[fabric]

Personally, I like the ability to run my wires from the top or bottom of a terminal... To my eyes that looks just as "correct" as wiring from the side... And it allows for more compact diagrams which is often important to me too.

Sorry - no kudos. 

[Darren]

Any idea that has received less than 2 kudos within 2 years after posting will be automatically declined.