The use case for this idea is already fulfilled by the use of path notation (e.g. ..\..\) with the Build Path function. Duplicating this functionality on Strip Path would provide minimal additional benefit.
It would be nice if the Strip Path function had a recursive option rather than having to string Strip Paths together or use an external loop.
Save for Previous always tries to do something like that when we introduce new functionality to an existing node. Yes, this would be easy to replace with a subVI when saving backwards. That should not be a concern when judging whether this is a good idea or not... and I think it is a good idea.
I do not feel the need that much for this option. If the file structure is a constant, you also need to go up sometimes. Going up&down in a folder structure can be done already like this:
In your example the string would be "..\..\..\.."
In specfic cases where you need to move more dynamically you can do some other stuff quite easily. An example is the format into string (to select folders) or just a simple for loop:
I just edited the idea name and description to use the word "recursive" instead of the original "recusive". Hopefully this will help with future searches.
The use case for this idea is already fulfilled by the use of path notation (e.g. ..\..\) with the Build Path function. Duplicating this functionality on Strip Path would provide minimal additional benefit.
