Hello,
I had recentlty to modify the public interface of one of my custom step.
The automatic type conflict detection diden't work ! I had to modify all my sequence file manually, by only launch the "reload prototype" !
(All versions of my custom step has been upgraded in order to generate a conflict !)
So, i thaught, i could use the "sequence file converter tool" to upgrade existing sequence files ...
But no !
The sequence file converter only converts the properties which cannot be modified by the final user. (The one who write sequences)
=> The NI Answer is : All properties that could be modified on a step instance, will not be upgraded by the sequence file converter.
So, neither the default action will never be upgraded, nor all properties ....
AIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE ! What can i do for my customer hundred of sequenceFiles ....
So, I had customized my custom step in order to lock all properties for the end user (Disable properties) ...
I thaught the Sequence file converter will detect that the step instances could not be modified ... and then it will do the right work !
Even with this lock, the sequence converter don't upgrade my existing sequences !
The NI answer to my problem is : You should do it right from the begining !
It is well known that the projects need didn't change during the software life cycle !!!!!!
So i decide to do my own sequence file converter for my application ... and it works fine ... but i think this need is general ... and could be integrated into TestStand.
I would like, in the sequenceFileConverter, to be abble to :
The tool could ask other options like ...
I know very well that the behaviour of such a tool would need many parameters in order to handle all needs.
But, this could be done in many times ...
The first need is something like an automatic prototype reload, with existing parameters reusing, and default values for type mismatch, or new parameters.
Thanks for help.
Manu.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
I'm declining this request due to limited support from the community. I also think the main request here is a better way to create and maintain custom step types, which i have noted.
Thanks for the feedback,
Trent