I am not sure I agree with making Bounds a writeable property. I have yet to find a control I could not resize, but sometimes you have to look quite a bit to find it (which is a problem). However, and this is only my opinion, the reason for this seems to lie in the differences in controls. Taking an extreme example, how do you resize a graph? The answer is you change the plot area size. This will maintain the same sizes for all the axes and other things associated with the graph. However, you can also change the width given to the axes. This does not change the total control size, but eats into the plot size. All the changes taken together give a highly reproducible way to change the size of the graph control. If the Bounds property were writeable, how would you change the relative sizes of all the objects in the graph control? I can think of several valid ways to do it, but I would not want to commit to any one of them, as their validity does not cover all situations. The current situation covers every use case I have ever run into. It is only when LabVIEW tries to be too smart (e.g. auto setting the number of major increments on a graph axis) that problems occur. Having a writeable Bounds property would cause a lot of this type of issue.
I will admit that the graph is an extreme case, but I also would not want inconsistency. Bounds is not writeable and is available on every control in a highly consistent manner. All controls (at least in my experience) can be resized using their custom properties/methods. Sometimes annoying, but consistent.
To directly answer your questions: Cluster Size is a writeable property for clusters. Arrays can be resized in a number of ways, such as changing the number of columns or rows shown and resizing the array element itself.
