NI TestStand Idea Exchange

Top Authors

User

Kudos

Post an idea

Currently, you have to choose between these options on each file (and the only indication of the choice is in the sequence file properties dialog). Both options can be quite useful in the Parallel and Batch Model (of course there isn't much of a difference in the Sequential Model). Clunky workarounds also exist like using Shared File Globals and having arrays for anything per-execution or using Separate File Globals while putting anything shared in Station Globals or in LabVIEW Functional Globals, but I think native support for both in the same file would be much cleaner and easier.

This could be just having two "FileGlobals" categories in the Variables pane (I prefer this), or it could be a right-click option on each individual File Global.

View All (2)

View All (4)

Obviously it's not a great idea to have loads of nested conditional steps, but for longer sequences even with only a few nested conditions, I find it hard to find the matching END for example when an if-statement. Sure I can count the number of lines, but I think it would be a lot easier if the "scope line" that indicates the scope would stand out more and become bold or blue (like the selected line)

Here's are two mockups (bold line)

An alternative indication could be to highlight the ending line of the scope like below.

Having a keyboard shortcut for jumping between beginning and the ending within a scope would also be very helpful!

In Microsoft Visual Studio there's a keyboard shortcut (CTRL + [ ) which toggles the cursor position between the and and beginning of a scope, and it works with all things that encapsulates a scope or a string or expression. e.g. curly braces in code sections, quoted strings etc.

When building any type of distribution it would be nice to have the following actions

1) Pre-Image Build Script -> Execute windows command or batch file

2) Post-Image Build -> Execute windows command or batch file

3) Post-Distribution Build -> Execute windows command or batch file

The purpose of the three entry points is to allow the user to preform actions of their choosing.

Action #1 is to be run just prior to Starting Analysis to allow the user to preform any automated actions prior to analyzing the build project.

Action #2 is to be run after the deployment image structure and all files are created on disk but before the distribution package is create. The purpose of this action is to allow the user to inject any files, update files, preform verification or hashing and so on. In my specific use case, I need to create a file that has relative paths and a hash value for each file being deployed. This process is automated but currently run manually prior to a package build.

Action #3 is to be run after the Distribution package is made. Automate any file steps such as uploading the file to a network location, or generating an automated email.

Each action should call the script with parameters such as path info, deployment name or provide a list of variables that users can choose to have added to the command line for each action.

If the action script or command returns a non-zero value the Build process should terminate.

Re-Posted from (https://forums.ni.com/t5/NI-TestStand/TestStand-Deployment-Utility-Scripts/td-p/4373139)

View All (1)

Axis labels for graphs in report

View All (5)

Since TestStand 2019, it's possible to configure an action step with a LabVIEW Module to switch between using a source VI and using the same one but compiled into a LabVIEW Packed Project Library (PPL).

The option, accessible in two ways, is called "Always run VI in Packed Project Library".

That's a neat possibility since it's allow to switch between a development version with easy debugging of a classical VI, and an optimized and locked production version with PPL.
One non compiled VI
One compiled VI into a PPL
One LabVIEW project
One TestStand step

However, when LabVIEW Adapter is set to Run-Time, a tight coupling between the compiled VI and the non-compiled VI is maintained for no reason.

Example 1)
-A VI is developed and compiled on a development machine A
-It is called as the module of an action step
-The VI, the PPL, the .lvproj and the .seq are pasted on a production machine B with fresh installations of LabVIEW and TestStand
-LabVIEW Adapter set to Run-Time on machine B
-Always run VI in Packed Project Library set on machine B
--> The execution will not start, since the classical error -17600 appears on the call. The reason is because the LabVIEW cache of the machine B does not contains data from the .lvproj. Simply opening then closing the .lvproj updates the LV cache, which solves the issue. However, it makes no sense to depend of the LabVIEW development environment on this production machine since the LabVIEW Adapter is set to Run-Time and "Always run VI in Packed Project Library" is enabled.

Example 2)
-LabVIEW Adapter set to Run-Time
-Always run VI in Packed Project Library
--> If source VI is deleted, it takes a long time to preload the modules. See here

Proposition :
When the LabVIEW Adapter is set to Run-Time and "Always run VI in Packed Project Library" is enabled, it should be possible :
- To not install the LabVIEW development environment (only the LV Run-Time)
- To keep only the PPL (and eventually the .lvproj) and to delete the source VI (no source code on production machine)

Add JSON string function

when manipulating data between different system, JSON string are very usefull to have a standardize, simple and readable exchange format.

Python or LabVIEW can dump structure (dictionnaires or Cluster) to JSON and vice versa.

It can be very usefull to allow to dump a TestStand variable or container to JSON and vice versa.

It can be good to have also a way to have native function in string functions to read, write or add a specific value in a JSON string.

MaximeR

View All (1)

I just switched from TS2019 to TS2023. I am not finding a way to configure the TS editor, witch is a hard to orientate flash of white and black screen. The color separation of the different panes, icons, step colors, fields and menues is not given and there are no clearly visible frames distinguished by backcolors. Working with this new GUI is tedious and not suitable, not suporting a rapid development idea. The attention of development shold be by the code and not by the absorbing search and brain consuming editor. How can I use the old 2019 condition gain? Could you please change this in the NEXT Teststand version?

TestStand File Diff and Merge Utility has the ability to produce reports in XML format with a slew of dependencies on TestStand (stylesheets, button images, etc.) making them not very portable. Yes, I know they can be packaged with the extra utility, but that's a hassle too. Now instead of managing a file I have to manage a folder of files.

Additionally, these reports only seem to work with Internet Explorer which I'm hearing is going away. Not sure if it's just me, but Edge's IE mode doesn't seem to work for these reports either.

Can NI do something to address this?

Make a browser extension that works with at least chromium based browsers.
Figure out a nice PDF format.

Ideally, I want to upload the file type into my code review platform of choice (git, perforce swarm, crucible, network folder share, etc.) and not require my reviewer to have TestStand installed on their machine.

Hi folks,

When writing TestStand UI components using LabVIEW, there are a lot of scenarios where using a callback VI to handle a TestStand event is the right move. As of writing this, that's the only way.

There have also been plenty of times when I would have preferred to handle a TestStand event directly within a LabVIEW event structure. In these kinds of scenarios my code would be less complicated if we had the ability to directly register TestStand engine events with LabVIEW's "Register for Events" node.

Years ago when learning TestStand, I tried to do this out of intuition and I was kind of surprised that it wasn't supported.

Below is an illustration of what I'm proposing.

View All (4)

In instances of nested expressions, it would be useful to be able to press tab to indent a line. I propose inserting "n" spaces when pressing tab.

Coding style of course varies, but for readability, I rather dislike the following

Trim(Locals.SomeLocal) == "" ? (Locals.SomeLocal = "foo",Locals.AnotherLocal = "bar", Locals.SomethingOrRather = "zoo") : False

...and much prefer this styling:

Trim(Locals.SomeLocal) == "" ? (
                Locals.SomeLocal = "foo",
                Locals.AnotherLocal = "bar",
                Locals.SomethingOrRather = "zoo" ) : False

...but at present the latter is tedious because one has to insert a lot of whitespace manually or worse yet, use another text editor and paste it into TestStand. It would be nice if TestStand's expression editor supported this basic feature available in almost every text editor or IDE.

Thanks,

Mr. Jim

View All (4)

The settings field can easily become too long to see every active option and there's not necesarily any consistency between steps if they have differing options. What I mean by that is if you only set the "Do Not Record Result" (my favorite) option in one step, it will be on the left of the settings field. But if you now set several options on another step, the settings are not lined up so that it becomes hard to see at a quick glance which steps I forgot to not record (because TS still doesn't default to not recording steps). You have to analyze the settings line for each step.

I propose something more graphical and ordered. Here's my idea of at least ordered. The text could be replaced with icons representing each setting.

Then it would be graphical, ordered, and concise. What more can you ask for?

View All (9)

Microsoft have stated that all future development in .NET will be based on .NET Core, a cross platform development framework. Therefore the current version of the .NET framework (version 4.8) is the last built on existing .NET technologies, with the next version .NET 5.0 to be built on .NET Core technologies.

Could an adapter that supports calling .NET Core modules be added into TestStand so that users of TestStand calling .NET modules can migrate to .NET Core?

View All (1)

When monitoring values within a loop in TestStand, it is often desired to only record step failure results. It would be useful to have a "Result Recording Option" of "Enabled On Step Failure":

This is possible through various means (SequenceFilePostResultListEntry callbacks and other custom code). However, I believe this would simplify TestStand sequence development significantly.

When creating custom step types, it is highly recommended to use Post-Step for calling execution module instead of Default Module.

Thus, when instanciating a custom step type, parameters passing is not saved within the sequence but only in the step type definition.

This allows to change parameters passing without having to update all the step types instances.

In some big test benches, it is intersesting to have low-level step types and high step types based on low level step types.

High level step types execution modules are sequences using low level step types.

Since sequence adapter is not available for Post-Step, we are obliged to call the sequence through Default Module.

Thus it can generate problems when adding parameters in sequence call.

I suggess to allow Sequence Call in SubStep creation :

Jean-Louis Schricke, MESULOG

TestStand Architect

Folding editor for control flow

It would be nice to be able to "fold" control flow blocks (like if - else -end, while - end etc.). Despite the vertical lines connecting the control flow steps on the same level, it is sometimes very hard to find where a long control block actually ends or what the condition for the "end" is you are currently looking at.

In such cases it would be helpful, if the entire control flow block could be hidden under its first line, tree-view like with a +/- icon to show/hide the interior of the block.

Regards

Peter

Modifying names in interface are never good idea, but some times it is must.

No matter is the change made in LabVIEW Front Panel or in TestStand type cluster mapping. Or the cluster type is changed for some other reason. The changes needs to be applied in LabVIEW module call parameters.

When you have multiple sequence files and multiple calls to same VI or with same cluster type in each of them, you would not really want to go trough the steps one by one.

Ideas:

- Cluster mapping changes apllied with LabVIEW Protorype reload

- Cluster mapping changes applied to hole sequence file or/and to all same VI calls in the sequence file

- Need of cluster mapping change applying notified with Analyzer

View All (2)

What do you need our team of experts to assist you with?

Request a quote Find the right product Place an order Get support on a product

How can we help?

Please enter your information below and we'll be intouch soon.

This field is required

Preferred communication method

Email Phone call

What do you need our team of experts to assist you with?

Request a quote Find the right product Place an order Get support on a product

NI TestStand Idea Exchange

Have Both Separate File Globals Per Execution and Shared File Globals in the Same File

Native support for maps or dictionaries in TestStand

Highlight the scope of selected a conditional step

Review all idea Exchange and Update status

TestStand Deployment Utility Scripts

Axis labels for graphs in report

Improvement of LabVIEW Packed Libraries TestStand options

Add JSON string function

Add Git to supported source code control providers

Allow Sequence Adapter to expand containers in the module tab

Graphical distinguishing of menues, pains, borders, icons etc in Teststand sequence Editor

Improve TestStand Diff Merge Utility Reporting

Support TestStand Engine Events Using LabVIEW Dynamic Event Registration

Support Tabs and Indentation in Expression Editor

Visual settings in the steps pane instead of a (sometimes) mile-long text list

Add support to call modules built with .NET Core

Add Result Recording Option "Enabled On Step Failure"

Sequence adapter available for substeps

Folding editor for control flow

Apply Cluster Passing Changes - Improvements