Marcus Törndahl

QUOTE (ned @ Jan 15 2009, 04:34 PM) Aha yes that works just fine, najs thanks. So by changing representation for the strict type def ring control all the ring constants will automatically be updated. Even the VIs not in memory...? Thank you all for the excellent help I have recieved here. BR, Marcus

QUOTE (ned @ Jan 15 2009, 04:34 PM) Aha yes that works just fine, najs thanks. So by changing representation for the strict type def ring control all the ring constants will automatically be updated. Even the VIs not in memory...? Thank you all for the excellent help I have recieved here. BR, Marcus

QUOTE (ned @ Jan 12 2009, 03:50 PM) Nop does not work for ring constants, sorry I have already tried it. Well all the instances are forced to update to that numeric representation but if you have added a new state in the ring type def and then do the change of numeric representation the ring constants is not updated to include the new state .

QUOTE (ned @ Jan 12 2009, 03:50 PM) Nop does not work for ring constants, sorry I have already tried it. Well all the instances are forced to update to that numeric representation but if you have added a new state in the ring type def and then do the change of numeric representation the ring constants is not updated to include the new state .

Well before anyone returns any message on "...well why don't you use an enum instead..." my quest is to use an ring constant with index numbers ranging from 1 to 1024. The problem is that type def ring constants do not update as enum constants. The only way, I know , is to change the constant to a control and then back to a constant. Hmmm ... well this would be a excellent task to create a tool to programmatically search for all ring constants and do the type change constant-->control-->constant. Well there I am stuck . Could this be done?