Alternative to SCALAR.INVALID

[Jason]

Hi Seeq, 

One of my calculations in Seeq requires me to use SCALAR.INVALID.toSignal() and a long chain of splice() formula. For example: 

SCALAR.INVALID.toSignal()

.splice(22.32.toSignal(),$a)

.splice(23.23.toSignal(),$b)

.splice(24.54.toSignal(),$c) 

.splice(25.72.toSignal(),$d)

.splice(26.02.toSignal(),$e)

.splice(27.11.toSignal(),$f)

.splice(28.54.toSignal(),$g) 

.splice(29.79.toSignal(),$h)

.splice(30.95.toSignal(),$i) 

.splice(31.45.toSignal(),$j)

.splice(32.72.toSignal(),$k)

.splice(33.97.toSignal(),$l)

.splice(34.76.toSignal(),$m)

However, the calculation is not able to complete loading. Is there an alternative to replace SCALAR.INVALID? Any suggestions on how to improve this calculation? 

[Sean T]

Jason,

A little bit more context on what you are trying to accomplish would help me offer a better suggestion. From what i can gather, you are trying to splice a bunch of different values together, one value for each condition $a through $m. When none of these values are present you want the signal to be without data (i.e. invalid) is that correct? do the conditions $a through $m ever overlap? Does the calculation go on endlessly giving you the spinning wheel? or does it error out in some way? If you only try splicing together say the first 4 conditions ($a through $d) will the calculation finish loading? 

if a 0 value is OK when no other data is present, try replacing scalar.invalid with 0 and see if it works. 

Using your formula and non-overlapping conditions i was able to get this long splice chain to work by commenting out, then retyping the offending lines of code (in my case, $d and $f both error-ed out for no clear reason. In retyping them they were accepted and the formula completed.)