Anyone else OCD about alignment and positioning in block diagrams?

[Sparkette]

When designing block diagrams, I tend to spend way too much time making sure things are aligned perfectly, down to the pixels. It's really annoying. This is most noticeable with bends in wires. I don't like having "uneven" bends, or bends where they aren't necessarily needed, or wires that cross unnecessarily. For instance:

Now you might wonder why I have bends there if I can just move the wires so they look straight. Well then they won't be perfectly aligned with the node's terminal. For instance:

Of course, when there are bends, I want them to be even. For instance, these are the steps I might take to "fix" this sequence of property nodes (that I wouldn't likely put together in practice to my knowledge):

Does anyone else have issues with trivial things like this? I find myself using the arrow keys a LOT on the block diagram to fix these kinds of things. Am I alone in that?

Edited August 16, 2013 by flarn2006

[ak_nz]

Does anyone else have issues with trivial things like this? I find myself using the arrow keys a LOT on the block diagram to fix these kinds of things. Am I alone in that?

 

Yes to the first and thus no to the second   . But I'm in recovery, honest.

[BramJ]

You are not alone....

 

and its CDO!

[patur]

Oh yes ... and that sounds like a great strategy with the arrows @neil. Now right-handers (like my self) wish we had a left-hand keyboard like this one http://www.fentek-ind.com/modular.htm#kblhusbsb 

[jcarmody]

You've probably even considered writing your own diagram clean-up utility, haven't you?  Admitting you have a problem is the first step to a cure.

 

Hi.  My name is Jim and I'm obsessive about a clean block diagram.

 

<everyone> Hi, Jim!

 

Here's one of my symptoms, manifested as a Quick Drop plugin.

[MikeC3]

Yes, this happens to me all the time.  Especially when partnering with another developer and seeing a wire that's off by just...one...pixel... 

 

I end up with my left hand oscillating a lot between the left ctrl/shift/alt block (easy access to space, e, c, v) and the arrow keys (with the right shift/ctrl and delete keys close at hand).

[crossrulz]

You are far from alone.  I too have written my own QD shortcuts to help alleviate some of the pain.  Still need to figure out how to auto align by terminals consistently the way I want.

[george seifert]

Oh and don't forget about aligning the front panel so that the little bullseye of the alignment grid is in the exact upper left corner.

 

George

[crossrulz]

Oh and don't forget about aligning the front panel so that the little bullseye of the alignment grid is in the exact upper left corner.

 

George

Got that covered in a QD as well.  https://decibel.ni.com/content/docs/DOC-20833

[hooovahh]

Okay I don't think I'm as bad as some of you guys but I too find my self moving things one pixel at a time some times to line them up nicer.  But there are a few times that I hate the terminal choices used by NI.  Here are two times that I can think of that irk me.

 

 

 

Why do these not line up?  Seriously NI?  Seriously?

Edited August 16, 2013 by hooovahh

[Val Brown]

NI does that intentionally just to see if you're paying attention.  They can tell when they hear the "crash".....

 

 

 

Okay I don't think I'm as bad as some of you guys but I too find my self moving things one pixel at a time some times to line them up nicer.  But there are a few times that I hate the terminal choices used by NI.  Here are two times that I can think of that irk me.

 

 

 

Why do these not line up?  Seriously NI?  Seriously?

[Tim_S]

Alone? No, this looks like a support group forming. I resisted the urge to go realign every VI in a project after moving from a XP to Win7 machine (yea, I use the default fonts).

[Val Brown]

Right, a new AA: LV Aligners Anonymous....

 

Alone? No, this looks like a support group forming. I resisted the urge to go realign every VI in a project after moving from a XP to Win7 machine (yea, I use the default fonts).

[hooovahh]

Right, a new AA: LV Aligners Anonymous....

Instead of 12 Steps we have 12 States.

 

1. We admitted we were powerless over LabVIEW OCD alignment—that our lives had become unmanageable
   
   
2. Came to believe that through hard work and determination, ourselves could restore us to sanity.
   
   
3. Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the block diagram cleanup as we understand it.
   
   
4. Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.
   
   
5. Admitted to ourselves, LAVA, and to another human being the exact nature of our OCD.
   
   
6. Were entirely ready be content with these wiring defects.
   
   
7. Humbly asked developers to review their code and accept it when the review is complete.
   
   
8. Made a list of all developers who did not adhere to the LabVIEW style guide, and became willing to make amends to them all.
   
   
9. Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.
   
   
10. Continued to take personal inventory, and when spending too much time adjusting wires, promptly admitted it.
    
    
11. Sought through research and discussions to improve ourselves, for knowledge of other developers for us and the power to carry that out.
    
    
12. Having had a acceptance and realization as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to other LabVIEW OCD wire addicts, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.
    
    

You would be surprised how little this differs from the actual 12 steps.

Edited August 16, 2013 by hooovahh

[ShaunR]

Everyone thinks that the CLAD exam is to test for understanding. It isn't. It is a test for Compulsive Labview Alignment Disorder. So all certified programmers have this pre-occupation.

[LogMAN]

There you are my soul... How dare you talk about my programming habits in the public?

Damn most time my left hand moves on its own and all the icons and lines align by themselves just to ease my eyes

It does not even take me longer to get my stuff finished.

 

However we LabVIEW programmer are not called 'pixel pusher' for nothing

[hooovahh]

However we LabVIEW programmer are not called 'pixel pusher' for nothing

I don't use auto tool (lets not get this started) so I am very quickly pressing tab, on top of all the quick drop functions, compulsive CTRL+S, and constant CTRL+E or CTRL+W.  As a result I have been called the Certified LabVIEW Finger F***er.  

[Sparkette]

Okay I don't think I'm as bad as some of you guys but I too find my self moving things one pixel at a time some times to line them up nicer.  But there are a few times that I hate the terminal choices used by NI.  Here are two times that I can think of that irk me.

 

 

 

Why do these not line up?  Seriously NI?  Seriously?

 

Why are you using To More Specific Class there? AFAIK, Bool is more specific than Control, so To More Generic Class would make more sense.

But yeah, I hate it when the terminals are like that. 1 pixel bends look terrible. That's one case when I'd rather have the wire not line up perfectly with the terminal.

Edited August 16, 2013 by flarn2006

[hooovahh]

Why are you using To More Specific Class there? AFAIK, Bool is more specific than Control, so To More Generic Class would make more sense.

Maybe I made a superBoolean class that is a subset of the boolean class that I want to be more specific to.  Or maybe I just grabbed the first two functions I knew would demonstrate my frustration and took a screenshot.

[Rolf Kalbermatter]

Yup, these annoy me too! I normally space them horizontally until the single pixel bend is not visible, or I keep the nodes in the same place and move the wire bend so it occurs directly on top of the terminal and so can't be seen on the BD. 

 

While I certainly also am among the people who should attend the aformentioned LAA group, I do not try to hide these bends. Alignment were it is possible yes, otherwise leave it. I prefer to see that the wire goes indeed to the terminal that it looks like and not some other one, even if that alignment may only be off one pixel. Nothing as frustrating for me but connector panes (pains) that are chaotic or wires going into an icon other than where they really connect.

[Rolf Kalbermatter]

Guess you are not going to like the new webDav API in 2013... the whole API uses 5x3x3x5 connector pain 

 

No, definitely not! 4*2*2*4 should be the standard and strictly enforced for all LabVIEW programmers, if I had a say in this!

And anyone using the 6*4*4*6 for a VI that is not private to the library should be banned from writing LabVIEW programs.

[ShaunR]

4*2*2*4 should be the standard and strictly enforced for all LabVIEW programmers, if I had a say in this!

 

Yeah. Well. You'd run into problems with me then, because I use 4*1*1*4 almost exclusively. With this layout the programmer has the choice to place key parameters or indicators (like AE typedefs or event refnums) above or below the VI depending where there is more space and/or less wire crossing. With the introduction of polymorphic VIs; there are only rare occasions where more than 6 inputs or outputs are required..

[crossrulz]

Guess you are not going to like the new webDav API in 2013... the whole API uses 5x3x3x5 connector pain 

At least they were consistent.  We might not all agree with NI's decision.  And that was brought up in the Beta.  I think it came down to the fact that there was a few functions that needed more terminals than the 4-2-2-4 would allow.  Therefore all went to 5-3-3-5.

[hooovahh]

Actually I could live with 4*1*1*4, as it's the 4 on either end that are most important to me. I kind of like your arrangement as it means the enums (I presume) hanging off the bottom are nicely aligned.

I'm okay with this for the same reason.

 

But I would rather be consistent.  Look at the sample I posted with the TDMS functions.  That gets me every time that I need to be one pixel off whenever that palette is used.  I would rather they were consistent with 5-3-3-5 (or what ever they picked).

 

But I would say that 4-2-2-4 is my standard and very rarely deviate from it.  But just as the style guide is a guide, I would say that a 4-2-2-4 setup should not be strictly enforced and if I were king of LabVIEW I wouldn't ban anyone if they used another.

[Phillip Brooks]

hooovahh - alter-ego of crelf and king of LabVIEW

 

I like it!