Leaderboard

First of all, this thread pretty much makes me want to vomit all over my keyboard so I take it in small doses. Front Panels make a little more sense to worry about since it is higher on the substance-style scale. Once again let me post my pipe dream, how is this for debugging your BD? We don't need no stinking Front Panels.

Not sure whether I should post here, or on the developers' forum... so here goes... I've used parts of the OpenG tools for a number of years, particularly the data tools, string, and variant config packages. Recently I've taken to modifying a few VIs and typedefs and carefully segregating out the modified bits. The specific modification I'd like to discuss was the inclusion of support within the variant and string routines for fixed-point datatype. (I have a concise list of the changes needed to support FXP.) So, first question: are any of the members of the OpenG developers' community planning to officially roll this in? I saw it brought up as a request (perhaps informally) over a year ago. Second question - if I have identified what I feel is a bug/incorrect behavior, to whom do I direct the description? I've found some inelegancies with how the Scan Variant from String VI behaves with enums, and have a proposed fix. Any takers? Thanks, Dave

I suggested pretty much this idea a couple of years ago, but it's suffering from a lack of kudos and discussion. The core of the idea is that the BD is the only required part of a VI, but it's possible to add one or more FP views which could give different views for UI, debugging, etc, but only when required. 99% of my subVIs have no requirement for a FP, and I often don't even worry about arranging things particularly nicely, as once created, I never look at it. For example, every Class Accessor VI - why have a FP at all? Darin's pic is not a bad addition either, though it probably only makes sense for small subVIs - and most are, at least in my experience.