Microsoft/bcquality
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/microsoft/BCQuality.git synced 2026-10-07 07:36:54 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 4

Fix remaining correctness issues from Jesper's 2026-09-15 re-review

Browse source 
- use-generateguid-for-unique-test-fixture-values.md: narrowed the
  collision rule to primary-key/unique-lookup fields - an ordinary
  descriptive field carries no uniqueness constraint, so a hardcoded
  or deterministic value there isn't the anti-pattern (the article and
  its al-testing-review.md worklist cue both said "primary-key or
  descriptive field"). Also corrected GenerateRandomCode: it opens its
  target table as a temporary RecordRef that starts and stays empty,
  so its repeat/until loop always exits after one iteration and never
  retries even within a single test run - the "non-colliding within a
  test run" claim was false. It's the rightmost N characters of
  GenerateGUID()'s sequential series, so a short field's value cycles
  (Code[1] repeats every 10 calls, Code[2] every 100). Verified against
  LibraryUtility.Codeunit.al in the BCApps reference clone.
- item-ledger-entry-document-no-follows-last-shipping-no: both
  fixtures called FindSet() without consuming its optional Boolean,
  which raises a runtime error on an empty result set - the opposite
  of the article's own claimed "silently matches zero rows, no error"
  behavior. Wrapped in `if ... then;` per the existing
  guard-database-reads.good.al idiom.
- al-data-modeling-review.md: widened both not-applicable scope
  clauses (intro and outcome) to include dimension wiring, posting-
  routine structure, and Item Ledger Entry document-number lookups -
  the leaf declared itself not-applicable outside setup/master/key/
  numbering/block/audit surfaces despite having a targeted cue for
  this PR's own new article.
- Converted this PR's 8 plain-backtick "See sample: `x.good.al`."
  references (across all 4 new articles) to the READ-convention
  markdown-link form required by Knowledge-Retrieval.ps1.

Rebased onto upstream/main (one conflict in al-data-modeling-review.md
intro wording, merged).
This commit is contained in:
Michael Dieringer 2026-09-21 22:35:42 +02:00
parent 26871856ee
commit db9c0f275a
8 changed files with 16 additions and 16 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

4
microsoft/knowledge/testing/use-testpage-editable-to-verify-field-editability.md
View file

@ -17,10 +17,10 @@ Whether a field can actually be changed is a distinct state from whether it is s
Open the `TestPage` with `OpenEdit()`, navigate to the relevant record, then assert against `TestPageField.Editable()` to verify whether the field can be changed under the given precondition.
See sample: `use-testpage-editable-to-verify-field-editability.good.al`.
See sample: [`use-testpage-editable-to-verify-field-editability.good.al`](use-testpage-editable-to-verify-field-editability.good.al).
## Anti Pattern
Asserting `Enabled()` (or checking nothing at all) when the actual claim is about editability, or opening the page with `OpenView()` when the field's editability depends on business logic that only applies in edit mode.
See sample: `use-testpage-editable-to-verify-field-editability.bad.al`.
See sample: [`use-testpage-editable-to-verify-field-editability.bad.al`](use-testpage-editable-to-verify-field-editability.bad.al).