mirror of
https://github.com/microsoft/BCQuality.git
synced 2026-10-06 07:06:54 +01:00
Address second round of Jesper Schulz-Wedde's review on PR #157
- log-writes-must-survive-rollback.good.al: fixed invalid trigger OnRun(var Rec: ...) declaration; Rec is implicit when TableNo is set. - exposed-objects-must-be-in-a-permission-set.md: distinguished the three exposure mechanisms (page/query web service or API, codeunit published as a web service, [ServiceEnabled] bound action on a page) and their actual permission targets (page/query "..." = X vs codeunit "..." = X). - code-must-not-change-workdate.md: scoped from an absolute "never" to "not as a side effect of unrelated logic" - verified real WorkDate(x) setter usage in BCApps demo-data generators and test codeunits. - bcpt-scenarios-must-be-app-specific.md: SingleInstance and StartScenario/EndScenario reframed as context-dependent patterns, not mandatory requirements - BCPT Create Customer uses neither. - test-feature-scenario-tags.good.al/.bad.al: replaced the invented LibrarySales.CreateCustomerWithPrice/"Item Price Mgt." calls with a real, verified price-list-line test using Library - Sales/Library - Inventory/ Library - Price Calculation. - page-design-must-match-bc-page-type-conventions.md: scoped the missing UsageCategory anti-pattern to pages intended as searchable entry points. - defensive-vs-offensive-code-must-match-blast-radius.md/.good.al/.bad.al: replaced the VAT registration number "low blast radius" example with a genuinely cosmetic field (customer home page URL). - source-organized-by-feature-not-object-type.md: anti-pattern reframed as inconsistency with a repo's own convention, not the object-type scheme itself. - pictures-must-use-media-not-blob.md: removed leftover "image variants" wording contradicting the already-corrected MediaSet description. Proactively fixed while sweeping all fixtures for invented APIs: - given-blocks-must-cover-full-precondition-chain.bad.al: PostSalesOrder called with wrong arity and referenced an undeclared variable. - ui-test-codeunit-naming.good.al/.bad.al: replaced the same fake "Item Price Mgt."/TestPage "Item Price" with real Library - Sales calls and the real Customer Card TestPage. Worklist completeness: added review-skill cues for the 12 of 18 new rules that had none (al-appsource-review.md, al-data-modeling-review.md, al-error-handling-review.md, al-security-review.md, al-style-review.md x3, al-testing-review.md x2, al-ui-review.md, al-upgrade-review.md, al-web-services-review.md), and fixed test-feature-scenario-tags' cue, which only matched the compliant (tagged) shape instead of the anti-pattern (untagged/generic-named test). Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Michael Dieringer
parent
0120b874b2
commit
3842ef7138
26 changed files with 219 additions and 89 deletions
|
|
@ -13,28 +13,46 @@ application-area: [all]
|
|||
|
||||
The work date is a per-user session setting the user controls from the
|
||||
client (the date shown in the top-right corner, used to default posting
|
||||
dates and date filters). Application code must never call the `WorkDate`
|
||||
function to set a new value. Doing so changes what the user sees and
|
||||
defaults to for the rest of their session, as a side effect of running
|
||||
unrelated business logic — a surprising, hard-to-trace behavior change the
|
||||
user never asked for and has no visibility into.
|
||||
dates and date filters). Business logic unrelated to that setting must not
|
||||
call `WorkDate(NewDate)` as a side effect of doing something else — that
|
||||
silently changes what the user sees and defaults to for the rest of their
|
||||
session, a surprising, hard-to-trace behavior change the user never asked
|
||||
for and has no visibility into. This is not a blanket ban on the setter
|
||||
itself: BCApps' own demo-data generators legitimately save the current
|
||||
work date, set a specific one to backdate the data they create, and
|
||||
restore it afterward (see `CreateDemoEDocsBE.Codeunit.al`'s
|
||||
`WorkDate(SampleInvoiceDate)` / `WorkDate(SavedWorkDate)` pair), and test
|
||||
codeunits routinely set `WorkDate` deliberately to control the date context
|
||||
a test runs under (hundreds of calls across BCApps' test suite, for
|
||||
example `SustainabilityPostingTest.Codeunit.al`). Both are the code's
|
||||
*actual purpose*, not a side effect of something unrelated.
|
||||
|
||||
This is a call-direction distinction: reading the current work date via
|
||||
`WorkDate` (or `WorkDate()` with no argument) is fine and common — it is
|
||||
only the assignment form, `WorkDate(NewDate)`, that is the anti-pattern.
|
||||
This is a call-direction distinction for the read side: reading the
|
||||
current work date via `WorkDate` (or `WorkDate()` with no argument) is
|
||||
always fine.
|
||||
|
||||
## Best Practice
|
||||
|
||||
Read the work date to default a value; never write to it.
|
||||
Read the work date to default a value. Only write to it when changing it
|
||||
*is* the operation being performed — implementing the user's own
|
||||
work-date/settings action, or a test or demo-data routine that deliberately
|
||||
establishes a date context (saving and restoring the prior value if the
|
||||
routine must leave the session as it found it). Business logic that exists
|
||||
to do something else must never write `WorkDate` as an incidental side
|
||||
effect; if a calculation needs a specific date, pass or compute that date
|
||||
as a local variable instead.
|
||||
|
||||
See sample: `code-must-not-change-workdate.good.al`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
Setting the work date from within a codeunit, report, or page action
|
||||
changes session state the user owns, for the duration of a call that has
|
||||
nothing to do with the user's date preference. If a scenario genuinely
|
||||
needs a specific date for a calculation, pass or compute that date as a
|
||||
local variable — never repurpose the session's `WorkDate`.
|
||||
Setting the work date from within a codeunit, report, or page action whose
|
||||
purpose is unrelated to the user's date preference — for example, a
|
||||
posting or calculation routine that calls `WorkDate(SomeDate)` to make its
|
||||
own logic simpler. This changes session state the user owns for the
|
||||
duration of a call that was never about the work date, and never restores
|
||||
it. This is a different case from a test or demo-data routine explicitly
|
||||
declaring a date context: the anti-pattern is unrelated logic silently
|
||||
mutating state it does not own, not the setter form itself.
|
||||
|
||||
See sample: `code-must-not-change-workdate.bad.al`.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -30,8 +30,8 @@ file attachment blob unrelated to picture rendering).
|
|||
|
||||
## Best Practice
|
||||
|
||||
Use `Media` (or `MediaSet` for multiple image variants) for any field that
|
||||
holds a picture.
|
||||
Use `Media` for a single image, or `MediaSet` for multiple independent
|
||||
images, for any field that holds a picture.
|
||||
|
||||
See sample: `pictures-must-use-media-not-blob.good.al`.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
|||
// Both fields guarded the same way, out of habit rather than analysis.
|
||||
if SalesHeader.Get(SalesHeader."Document Type"::Order, DocumentNo) then
|
||||
VATRegNo := SalesHeader."VAT Registration No."; // low blast radius - fine
|
||||
if Customer.Get(SalesHeader."Sell-to Customer No.") then
|
||||
CustomerHomePage := Customer."Home Page"; // low blast radius - fine
|
||||
|
||||
// but the same pattern, unexamined, was also applied here:
|
||||
if SalesHeader.Get(SalesHeader."Document Type"::Order, DocumentNo) then
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
|
|||
// Low blast radius: guard, with an explicit chosen fallback.
|
||||
if SalesHeader.Get(SalesHeader."Document Type"::Order, DocumentNo) then
|
||||
VATRegNo := SalesHeader."VAT Registration No.";
|
||||
if Customer.Get(SalesHeader."Sell-to Customer No.") then
|
||||
CustomerHomePage := Customer."Home Page";
|
||||
// Blank is an acceptable, deliberately-considered default here - the field
|
||||
// is informational and a reviewer sees it before the document ships.
|
||||
// is purely a display convenience and a reviewer sees it before the document ships.
|
||||
|
||||
// High blast radius: let it fail loud, because this feeds posted VAT.
|
||||
SalesHeader.Get(SalesHeader."Document Type"::Order, DocumentNo);
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -21,6 +21,6 @@ See sample: `defensive-vs-offensive-code-must-match-blast-radius.good.al`.
|
|||
|
||||
## Anti Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
Guarding two fields the same way purely out of habit, without analyzing what each one feeds. A low-blast-radius field, such as a VAT registration number shown only on a printed document, and a high-blast-radius field, such as the VAT posting group that determines VAT actually applied to a posted transaction, are both wrapped in the same `if Header.Get(...) then ... else` pattern with a blank/zero fallback — leaving the posting-critical field free to post with a silently wrong value.
|
||||
Guarding two fields the same way purely out of habit, without analyzing what each one feeds. A low-blast-radius field, such as a customer's home page URL shown only for convenience on a printed document, and a high-blast-radius field, such as the VAT posting group that determines VAT actually applied to a posted transaction, are both wrapped in the same `if Header.Get(...) then ... else` pattern with a blank/zero fallback — leaving the posting-critical field free to post with a silently wrong value. A VAT registration number is not a safe stand-in for the low-risk side of this example: it is legally relevant, often validated, and can feed external VAT services or mandated document output, so it belongs on the offensive/fail-fast side alongside the posting group, not next to it as the "safe" contrast.
|
||||
|
||||
See sample: `defensive-vs-offensive-code-must-match-blast-radius.bad.al`.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ codeunit 50100 "Sample Error Log Writer"
|
|||
// session — there is no shared memory with the caller's instance.
|
||||
TableNo = "Sample Error Log Buffer";
|
||||
|
||||
trigger OnRun(var Rec: Record "Sample Error Log Buffer")
|
||||
trigger OnRun()
|
||||
var
|
||||
ErrorLogEntry: Record "Sample Error Log";
|
||||
begin
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -11,11 +11,17 @@ application-area: [all]
|
|||
|
||||
## Description
|
||||
|
||||
An object that is reachable from outside the app's own UI is only usable if it is also granted execute access through a permission set. Three distinct mechanisms make an object reachable this way, and each needs to be checked on its own terms: a page or query published through the **Web Services** configuration page; a custom REST endpoint declared with `PageType = API` / `QueryType = API`; or an individual codeunit method exposed with the `[ServiceEnabled]` attribute (a method-level attribute — it does not apply to pages or queries as a property). When such an object is left out of every permission set, it becomes both unusable (no caller, human or service, can reach it) and invisible in review: nobody deliberately decided who may call it. Exposure without a matching grant is not a safe default; it is an endpoint nobody is governing.
|
||||
An object that is reachable from outside the app's own UI is only usable if it is also granted execute access through a permission set. Three distinct mechanisms make an object reachable this way, each with its own permission target:
|
||||
|
||||
- A page or query published through the **Web Services** configuration page, or a custom REST endpoint declared with `PageType = API` / `QueryType = API` — both need a `page "..." = X` / `query "..." = X` entry for that object.
|
||||
- A codeunit published through **Web Services** exposes *every* public procedure on it as an OData/SOAP operation automatically — there is no per-method attribute to add. The permission target is the codeunit itself: `codeunit "..." = X`.
|
||||
- `[ServiceEnabled]` is a method-level attribute used on a *page* procedure to expose it as an OData v4 bound action (for example a `Post` action on an invoice page) — it does not apply to pages, queries, or codeunits as an object-level property, and it does not create its own permission target. The action is still a call into that page object, so the page's own `page "..." = X` entry is what governs it.
|
||||
|
||||
When such an object is left out of every permission set, it becomes both unusable (no caller, human or service, can reach it) and invisible in review: nobody deliberately decided who may call it. Exposure without a matching grant is not a safe default; it is an endpoint nobody is governing.
|
||||
|
||||
## Best Practice
|
||||
|
||||
Give every exposed object an explicit execute entry (`page "..." = X`, `query "..." = X`) in a permission set shipped by the app. Route sensitive endpoints into a dedicated, non-default admin permission set so reaching them requires a deliberate grant rather than being included by default. If an object should never be reachable from outside the app, remove the exposure itself (drop `PageType = API` / `ServiceEnabled`) rather than leaving an orphaned endpoint with no permission-set membership.
|
||||
Give every exposed object an explicit execute entry in a permission set shipped by the app: `page "..." = X` / `query "..." = X` for a published or API page/query (including one that exposes a `[ServiceEnabled]` bound action), and `codeunit "..." = X` for a codeunit published as a web service. Route sensitive endpoints into a dedicated, non-default admin permission set so reaching them requires a deliberate grant rather than being included by default. If an object should never be reachable from outside the app, remove the exposure itself (drop `PageType = API` / the Web Services registration) rather than leaving an orphaned endpoint with no permission-set membership.
|
||||
|
||||
See sample: `exposed-objects-must-be-in-a-permission-set.good.al`.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -28,9 +28,21 @@ Each feature folder holds every object type it needs; shared code has one dedica
|
|||
|
||||
## Anti Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
A repository that documents or has established feature-based organization
|
||||
as its convention, but then mixes in object-type folders for new work
|
||||
anyway:
|
||||
|
||||
src/
|
||||
├── Tables/
|
||||
├── Pages/
|
||||
├── Sales/
|
||||
│ └── Invoice/
|
||||
├── Tables/ <- new objects land here instead of a feature folder
|
||||
└── Codeunits/
|
||||
|
||||
Finding everything related to one feature now requires searching multiple folders and mentally reassembling it from scattered pieces.
|
||||
The anti-pattern is inconsistency with the project's own chosen convention,
|
||||
not the object-type scheme itself — a repository that deliberately and
|
||||
consistently organizes by object type throughout is exercising the other
|
||||
reasonable choice described above, not violating this rule. What actually
|
||||
costs a reader time is a codebase where some features live under their own
|
||||
folder and others are scattered across type folders, so finding everything
|
||||
related to one feature means checking both schemes and reassembling it from
|
||||
wherever each object happened to land.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ A PerformanceTest app that ships with only the generic Microsoft BCPT samples (c
|
|||
|
||||
## Best Practice
|
||||
|
||||
For every major business flow the extension adds, create a matching `BCPT*` scenario codeunit: `SingleInstance = true`, implementing `"BCPT Test Param. Provider"`, wrapping the operation under test in `BCPTTestContext.StartScenario()` / `EndScenario()`, and building its own test data in a local `InitTest()` procedure rather than depending on hardcoded records. Give each distinct step its own named scenario so a regression in one step doesn't hide inside a coarser measurement.
|
||||
For every major business flow the extension adds, create a matching `BCPT*` scenario codeunit implementing `"BCPT Test Param. Provider"`, building its own test data in a local `InitTest()` procedure rather than depending on hardcoded records. Beyond that shared shape, the interface details are context-dependent, not fixed requirements: most of Microsoft's own shipped BCPT samples declare `SingleInstance = true`, but `codeunit "BCPT Create Customer"` does not, relying instead on `OnRun` calling `InitTest()` unconditionally every run. Likewise, wrapping the operation under test in `BCPTTestContext.StartScenario()` / `EndScenario()` is a real, available pattern for splitting one codeunit's run into several separately measured steps — useful when a regression in one step should not hide inside a coarser, whole-`OnRun` measurement — but it is not what every sample does; `"BCPT Create Customer"` measures its entire `OnRun` as a single implicit scenario and never calls `StartScenario`/`EndScenario` at all. Choose per-step scenarios when step-level granularity matters to the flow being tested; otherwise a single measured `OnRun` is a legitimate, simpler choice.
|
||||
|
||||
See sample: `bcpt-scenarios-must-be-app-specific.good.al`.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -2,11 +2,14 @@
|
|||
procedure PostSalesOrder_CreatesInvoice()
|
||||
var
|
||||
SalesHeader: Record "Sales Header";
|
||||
SalesInvoiceHeader: Record "Sales Invoice Header";
|
||||
InvoiceNo: Code[20];
|
||||
begin
|
||||
// [GIVEN] a sales order — posting groups left to whatever exists in the test company
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateSalesOrder(SalesHeader);
|
||||
// [WHEN]
|
||||
LibrarySales.PostSalesOrder(SalesHeader, false, true);
|
||||
InvoiceNo := LibrarySales.PostSalesDocument(SalesHeader, false, true);
|
||||
// [THEN]
|
||||
SalesInvoiceHeader.Get(InvoiceNo);
|
||||
Assert.RecordIsNotEmpty(SalesInvoiceHeader);
|
||||
end;
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -3,7 +3,9 @@ codeunit 50102 "Item Price Testing"
|
|||
Subtype = Test;
|
||||
|
||||
var
|
||||
ItemPriceMgt: Codeunit "Item Price Mgt.";
|
||||
LibrarySales: Codeunit "Library - Sales";
|
||||
LibraryInventory: Codeunit "Library - Inventory";
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation: Codeunit "Library - Price Calculation";
|
||||
Assert: Codeunit "Library Assert";
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
|
|
@ -11,11 +13,21 @@ codeunit 50102 "Item Price Testing"
|
|||
var
|
||||
Customer: Record Customer;
|
||||
Item: Record Item;
|
||||
Price, Disc: Decimal;
|
||||
PriceListHeader: Record "Price List Header";
|
||||
PriceListLine: Record "Price List Line";
|
||||
SalesHeader: Record "Sales Header";
|
||||
SalesLine: Record "Sales Line";
|
||||
begin
|
||||
// setup mixed with assertions, no clear layers
|
||||
Customer.Insert(false);
|
||||
ItemPriceMgt.GetSalesPrice(Customer."No.", Item."No.", '', Price, Disc);
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(100, Price, '');
|
||||
// setup mixed with assertions, no clear layers, no FEATURE/SCENARIO/GIVEN/WHEN/THEN tags
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateCustomer(Customer);
|
||||
LibraryInventory.CreateItem(Item);
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreatePriceHeader(
|
||||
PriceListHeader, PriceListHeader."Price Type"::Sale, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.");
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreateSalesPriceLine(
|
||||
PriceListLine, PriceListHeader.Code, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.",
|
||||
"Price Asset Type"::Item, Item."No.");
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateSalesDocumentWithItem(
|
||||
SalesHeader, SalesLine, SalesHeader."Document Type"::Order, Customer."No.", Item."No.", 1, '', 0D);
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(PriceListLine."Unit Price", SalesLine."Unit Price", '');
|
||||
end;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -5,7 +5,8 @@ codeunit 50103 "Item Price Testing"
|
|||
|
||||
var
|
||||
LibrarySales: Codeunit "Library - Sales";
|
||||
ItemPriceMgt: Codeunit "Item Price Mgt.";
|
||||
LibraryInventory: Codeunit "Library - Inventory";
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation: Codeunit "Library - Price Calculation";
|
||||
Assert: Codeunit "Library Assert";
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
|
|
@ -13,14 +14,24 @@ codeunit 50103 "Item Price Testing"
|
|||
var
|
||||
Customer: Record Customer;
|
||||
Item: Record Item;
|
||||
UnitPrice, LineDiscPct: Decimal;
|
||||
PriceListHeader: Record "Price List Header";
|
||||
PriceListLine: Record "Price List Line";
|
||||
SalesHeader: Record "Sales Header";
|
||||
SalesLine: Record "Sales Line";
|
||||
begin
|
||||
// [SCENARIO] Customer with a specific price list line gets that unit price
|
||||
// [GIVEN] a customer with a price list line at 100 LCY
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateCustomerWithPrice(Customer, Item, '', 100);
|
||||
// [WHEN]
|
||||
ItemPriceMgt.GetSalesPrice(Customer."No.", Item."No.", '', UnitPrice, LineDiscPct);
|
||||
// [THEN]
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(100, UnitPrice, 'Unit price must match customer price list');
|
||||
// [GIVEN] a customer and an item with a customer-specific sales price list line
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateCustomer(Customer);
|
||||
LibraryInventory.CreateItem(Item);
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreatePriceHeader(
|
||||
PriceListHeader, PriceListHeader."Price Type"::Sale, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.");
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreateSalesPriceLine(
|
||||
PriceListLine, PriceListHeader.Code, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.",
|
||||
"Price Asset Type"::Item, Item."No.");
|
||||
// [WHEN] a sales line is created for that customer and item
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateSalesDocumentWithItem(
|
||||
SalesHeader, SalesLine, SalesHeader."Document Type"::Order, Customer."No.", Item."No.", 1, '', 0D);
|
||||
// [THEN] the sales line picks up the customer's price list line
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(PriceListLine."Unit Price", SalesLine."Unit Price", 'Unit price must match customer price list');
|
||||
end;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,15 +1,32 @@
|
|||
[Test]
|
||||
procedure GetPrice_ThenGetDiscount_ReturnsCorrectValues()
|
||||
procedure GetPrice_ThenGetPriceLines_ReturnsCorrectValues()
|
||||
var
|
||||
TempBuffer: Record "Item Price Tier Buffer" temporary;
|
||||
UnitPrice, LineDiscPct: Decimal;
|
||||
Customer: Record Customer;
|
||||
Item: Record Item;
|
||||
PriceListHeader: Record "Price List Header";
|
||||
PriceListLine: Record "Price List Line";
|
||||
SalesHeader: Record "Sales Header";
|
||||
SalesLine: Record "Sales Line";
|
||||
begin
|
||||
// [GIVEN] ...
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateCustomer(Customer);
|
||||
LibraryInventory.CreateItem(Item);
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreatePriceHeader(
|
||||
PriceListHeader, PriceListHeader."Price Type"::Sale, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.");
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreateSalesPriceLine(
|
||||
PriceListLine, PriceListHeader.Code, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.",
|
||||
"Price Asset Type"::Item, Item."No.");
|
||||
// [WHEN] first action
|
||||
ItemPriceMgt.GetSalesPrice(CustomerNo, ItemNo, '', UnitPrice, LineDiscPct);
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateSalesDocumentWithItem(
|
||||
SalesHeader, SalesLine, SalesHeader."Document Type"::Order, Customer."No.", Item."No.", 1, '', 0D);
|
||||
// [WHEN] second action — this is a second test in disguise
|
||||
ItemPriceMgt.GetSalesPriceTiers(CustomerNo, ItemNo, '', TempBuffer);
|
||||
PriceListLine.Validate("Minimum Quantity", 10);
|
||||
PriceListLine.Modify(true);
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreateSalesPriceLine(
|
||||
PriceListLine, PriceListHeader.Code, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.",
|
||||
"Price Asset Type"::Item, Item."No.");
|
||||
// [THEN] asserting two unrelated things
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(100, UnitPrice, '');
|
||||
Assert.IsFalse(TempBuffer.IsEmpty(), '');
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(PriceListLine."Unit Price", SalesLine."Unit Price", '');
|
||||
PriceListLine.SetRange("Price List Code", PriceListHeader.Code);
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(2, PriceListLine.Count(), '');
|
||||
end;
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -3,27 +3,51 @@ procedure GetPrice_CustomerPrice_ReturnsCorrectUnitPrice()
|
|||
var
|
||||
Customer: Record Customer;
|
||||
Item: Record Item;
|
||||
UnitPrice, LineDiscPct: Decimal;
|
||||
PriceListHeader: Record "Price List Header";
|
||||
PriceListLine: Record "Price List Line";
|
||||
SalesHeader: Record "Sales Header";
|
||||
SalesLine: Record "Sales Line";
|
||||
begin
|
||||
// [GIVEN] a customer with a price list line at 100
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateCustomerWithPrice(Customer, Item, '', 100);
|
||||
// [GIVEN] a customer with a price list line for the item
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateCustomer(Customer);
|
||||
LibraryInventory.CreateItem(Item);
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreatePriceHeader(
|
||||
PriceListHeader, PriceListHeader."Price Type"::Sale, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.");
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreateSalesPriceLine(
|
||||
PriceListLine, PriceListHeader.Code, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.",
|
||||
"Price Asset Type"::Item, Item."No.");
|
||||
// [WHEN]
|
||||
ItemPriceMgt.GetSalesPrice(Customer."No.", Item."No.", '', UnitPrice, LineDiscPct);
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateSalesDocumentWithItem(
|
||||
SalesHeader, SalesLine, SalesHeader."Document Type"::Order, Customer."No.", Item."No.", 1, '', 0D);
|
||||
// [THEN]
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(100, UnitPrice, 'Unit price must match price list');
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(PriceListLine."Unit Price", SalesLine."Unit Price", 'Unit price must match price list');
|
||||
end;
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
procedure GetPriceTiers_CustomerTier_ReturnsOneTierLine()
|
||||
procedure GetPriceLines_TwoMinimumQuantityLines_ReturnsBoth()
|
||||
var
|
||||
Customer: Record Customer;
|
||||
Item: Record Item;
|
||||
TempBuffer: Record "Item Price Tier Buffer" temporary;
|
||||
PriceListHeader: Record "Price List Header";
|
||||
PriceListLine: Record "Price List Line";
|
||||
begin
|
||||
// [GIVEN] a customer with a tier price at min qty 10
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateCustomerWithTierPrice(Customer, Item, '', 10, 90);
|
||||
// [GIVEN] a customer price list with two minimum-quantity price lines for the same item
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateCustomer(Customer);
|
||||
LibraryInventory.CreateItem(Item);
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreatePriceHeader(
|
||||
PriceListHeader, PriceListHeader."Price Type"::Sale, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.");
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreateSalesPriceLine(
|
||||
PriceListLine, PriceListHeader.Code, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.",
|
||||
"Price Asset Type"::Item, Item."No.");
|
||||
PriceListLine.Validate("Minimum Quantity", 10);
|
||||
PriceListLine.Modify(true);
|
||||
LibraryPriceCalculation.CreateSalesPriceLine(
|
||||
PriceListLine, PriceListHeader.Code, "Price Source Type"::Customer, Customer."No.",
|
||||
"Price Asset Type"::Item, Item."No.");
|
||||
PriceListLine.Validate("Minimum Quantity", 50);
|
||||
PriceListLine.Modify(true);
|
||||
// [WHEN]
|
||||
ItemPriceMgt.GetSalesPriceTiers(Customer."No.", Item."No.", '', TempBuffer);
|
||||
PriceListLine.SetRange("Price List Code", PriceListHeader.Code);
|
||||
// [THEN]
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(1, TempBuffer.Count(), 'Exactly one tier line expected');
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(2, PriceListLine.Count(), 'Exactly two price lines expected');
|
||||
end;
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -3,22 +3,25 @@ codeunit 50104 "Item Price Testing"
|
|||
Subtype = Test;
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
procedure GetPrice_LogicTest()
|
||||
procedure ApplyDiscount_LogicTest()
|
||||
var
|
||||
Customer: Record Customer;
|
||||
Item: Record Item;
|
||||
UnitPrice, LineDiscPct: Decimal;
|
||||
Assert: Codeunit "Library Assert";
|
||||
begin
|
||||
// logic test — fine on its own, but not paired with a UI test below
|
||||
ItemPriceMgt.GetSalesPrice(Customer."No.", Item."No.", '', UnitPrice, LineDiscPct);
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(90, ApplyDiscount(100, 10), 'A 10% discount on 100 must yield 90');
|
||||
end;
|
||||
|
||||
local procedure ApplyDiscount(UnitPrice: Decimal; DiscountPct: Decimal): Decimal
|
||||
begin
|
||||
exit(UnitPrice - (UnitPrice * DiscountPct / 100));
|
||||
end;
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
procedure Page_ShowsPrice_UT()
|
||||
procedure CustomerCard_Opens_UT()
|
||||
var
|
||||
ItemPricePage: TestPage "Item Price";
|
||||
CustomerCard: TestPage "Customer Card";
|
||||
begin
|
||||
// UI test mixed into a logic-test codeunit, and the codeunit lacks the _UT suffix
|
||||
ItemPricePage.OpenNew();
|
||||
CustomerCard.OpenNew();
|
||||
end;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -3,13 +3,18 @@ codeunit 50105 "Item Price Testing"
|
|||
Subtype = Test;
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
procedure GetPrice_CustomerPrice_ReturnsUnitPrice()
|
||||
procedure ApplyDiscount_ReducesUnitPrice()
|
||||
var
|
||||
Customer: Record Customer;
|
||||
Item: Record Item;
|
||||
UnitPrice, LineDiscPct: Decimal;
|
||||
Assert: Codeunit "Library Assert";
|
||||
DiscountedPrice: Decimal;
|
||||
begin
|
||||
ItemPriceMgt.GetSalesPrice(Customer."No.", Item."No.", '', UnitPrice, LineDiscPct);
|
||||
DiscountedPrice := ApplyDiscount(100, 10);
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual(90, DiscountedPrice, 'A 10% discount on 100 must yield 90');
|
||||
end;
|
||||
|
||||
local procedure ApplyDiscount(UnitPrice: Decimal; DiscountPct: Decimal): Decimal
|
||||
begin
|
||||
exit(UnitPrice - (UnitPrice * DiscountPct / 100));
|
||||
end;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -18,16 +23,20 @@ codeunit 50106 "Item Price Testing_UT"
|
|||
Subtype = Test;
|
||||
|
||||
[Test]
|
||||
procedure Page_EnterCustomerAndItem_FactBoxShowsPrice()
|
||||
procedure CustomerCard_SetName_UpdatesField()
|
||||
var
|
||||
Customer: Record Customer;
|
||||
Item: Record Item;
|
||||
ItemPricePage: TestPage "Item Price";
|
||||
CustomerCard: TestPage "Customer Card";
|
||||
Assert: Codeunit "Library Assert";
|
||||
LibrarySales: Codeunit "Library - Sales";
|
||||
begin
|
||||
ItemPricePage.OpenNew();
|
||||
ItemPricePage.CustomerNo.SetValue(Customer."No.");
|
||||
ItemPricePage.ItemNo.SetValue(Item."No.");
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual('100.00', ItemPricePage.PriceInfo.UnitPrice.Value(), '');
|
||||
LibrarySales.CreateCustomer(Customer);
|
||||
CustomerCard.OpenEdit();
|
||||
CustomerCard.GoToRecord(Customer);
|
||||
CustomerCard.Name.SetValue('Updated Name');
|
||||
CustomerCard.Close();
|
||||
|
||||
Customer.Get(Customer."No.");
|
||||
Assert.AreEqual('Updated Name', Customer.Name, 'Name must be updated through the page');
|
||||
end;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -75,9 +75,11 @@ page with no `CardPageID` even though a Card page exists for the same
|
|||
table — signals a design step was skipped, not a stylistic choice. A
|
||||
Card page over a composite-key table is not automatically this anti
|
||||
pattern; check whether the table supplements a master record first. Also watch
|
||||
for: a Worksheet or List page showing primary-key fields it shouldn't (or
|
||||
hiding them when it should show them), and a page with no
|
||||
`UsageCategory` set, which makes it invisible to Tell Me search even
|
||||
though it otherwise works.
|
||||
for a Worksheet or List page showing primary-key fields it shouldn't (or
|
||||
hiding them when it should show them). A page with no `UsageCategory` set
|
||||
is not automatically a defect either: supporting pages, subpages, dialogs,
|
||||
and pages intended only to be reached through another workflow correctly
|
||||
have no `UsageCategory` — flag its absence only on a page intended as a
|
||||
searchable entry point in its own right.
|
||||
|
||||
See sample: `page-design-must-match-bc-page-type-conventions.bad.al`.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue