LabVIEW Idea Exchange

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
FlamingYawn

Option to "Dock" the Iteration Terminal

Status: New

How about the ability to "dock" the iteration terminal?  Docking it will keep it from moving around when when you resize the loop and keep it out of the way; plus it spells NI!

 

 Docked I.png

Robert Mortensen
CLA, CLED, LabVIEW Champion, Principal Systems Engineer, Testeract
11 Comments
elset191
Active Participant
Not bad, but I think I'd prefer just to be able to hide it altogether, since it only moves around if it's unwired.
--
Tim Elsey
Certified LabVIEW Architect
PhillipBrooks
Active Participant

The position of the iterator in the structure is relative to the lower-left corner. I've moved it around on occasion, but I find it's easiest to just leave it in the lower left.

 

It might be nice if it could be made 'sticky', like the labels (except to the inside positions) ...

Message Edited by Phillip Brooks on 03-10-2010 07:45 AM

Now is the right time to use %^<%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S%3uZ>T
If you don't hate time zones, you're not a real programmer.

"You are what you don't automate"
Inplaceness is synonymous with insidiousness

Manzolli
Active Participant
Good idea. I understand that the user can dock the Iteration Terminal [i] after it has a connection. Before a connection it follows the lower left corner. Same for the Condition Terminal [O]. As an option, it will be very nice since I like to keep these terminals in their original positions to help readability. Kudos!
André Manzolli

Mechanical Engineer
Certified LabVIEW Developer - CLD
LabVIEW Champion
Curitiba - PR - Brazil
CrystalTech
Member
I agree, and I think the docking next to the N is clever (it is out of the way of any code).  However, I like the idea of making it disappear to better for my needs.  Still, I like your idea... Kudos!
AristosQueue (NI)
NI Employee (retired)

FYI -- putting it next to the N would be a problem since that would block the inside terminal of the N. That inside terminal gives you the total times the loop will iterate, useful if your loop count is dictated by an autoindexing tunnel.

 LoopCount.png

JackDunaway
Trusted Enthusiast

 

 Aristos Queue wrote:

 

FYI -- putting it next to the N would be a problem since that would block the inside terminal of the N

 


Such a horizontal mindset. Clearly, a samurai would identify this "shortcoming" you point out as a feature. But on the idea of blocked terminals, Allow Timeout Terminal on Event Structures to Move.

JÞB
Knight of NI

I like it  but, it won't make NI happy to have Ni.  For both times I used the N teminal I could have wired from the bottom so I see no problem there (and I could have the option to undock the iteration termial if thats really an issue)

 

The only problem I have with this is What to do when swapping For loops for While loops?  Would we dock below the stop termial or stay in the top-left corner.  If a consistant behavior between for, timed, anf while loops is not possible that could be a deal breaker for me


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
jason_h2
Member

Clearly docking should merge the two like this:

 

for loop docking.PNG

RavensFan
Knight of NI

"Clearly docking should merge the two like this:" 

 

That picture does not make it clear at all which would be N and which would be i.

 

I myself don't think it is necesasry to dock i anywhere.  But if you did dock them, put N on top and i below. 

JackDunaway
Trusted Enthusiast

I'm with Ravens, I can't picture a situation where docking would improve usability or readability - it actually hinders both. 

 

If I'm reading this idea correctly, the only reason you would want to dock the iteration terminal is to keep it from moving when the loop is resized. If I have that terminal wired, I don't want it docked in upper-left hand corner - I want it as close to it's sink as possible to avoid wire crossing. Meaning the only scenario where docking makes sense is if the iteration terminal is unwired, in which case I would rather see the terminal hidden altogether.