The article was rewritten to say a reset is required only when the value can
carry over, and its H1 was updated to match, but three artefacts still carried
the old "always initialize to false" premise:
- The slug still read `initialize-ishandled-to-false-before-publishing`, which
contradicts the body. The slug is not cosmetic: Build-KnowledgeIndex.ps1
ranks candidates on keywords, frontmatter dimensions, domain, path and title,
so a stale path pushes selection back toward the behaviour this change
narrows. Renamed to `reset-ishandled-only-when-the-value-can-carry-over`,
following the existing precedent for conditional slugs such as
`unreleased-symbol-change-is-not-a-breaking-change`.
- Keywords still listed `initialization` and `deterministic` and omitted
`false-positive`, the tag this repository uses for suppression articles.
Replaced with `carry-over` and `loop-iteration` and added `false-positive`.
- The good sample demonstrated only the "prefer separate fresh locals" clause
and contained no reset at all, so the article's headline case had no positive
example. It was also asymmetric with the bad sample, which gained a loop
procedure showing a local that carries `true` into the next iteration.
Added the matching loop procedure to the good sample: a local declared outside
the loop is reset at the top of each iteration. That case cannot be solved by
introducing another local, because AL has no block scope, so it is the only
shape that demonstrates the reset the article still requires. It also gives the
engine the correct `suggested-code` shape for the loop finding; without it the
one-click fix adapted from the good sample would propose splitting the variable
rather than adding one line.
Also renamed the sample codeunits from "IsHandled Init ..." to
"IsHandled Carry Over ...", and updated the two references to the old slug:
the events leaf skill cue and the events pin in evaluation/review-fixtures.json.
validate_frontmatter.py reports 0 errors; Test-ReviewFixtures.ps1 passes with
32 cases across 16 leaf domains and resolves the events fixture to the renamed
article.
* Add events knowledge domain and review leaf skill
Add a new `events` knowledge domain covering AL events & subscribers,
wired into the AL review pipeline.
- 3 atomic articles (+ .good.al/.bad.al samples) under
microsoft/knowledge/events/: the IsHandled override pattern, thin
OnBefore/OnAfter integration-event publishers, and static vs manual
subscribers.
- New leaf skill microsoft/skills/review/al-events-review.md sourcing the
events domain.
- Wired into microsoft/skills/review/al-code-review.md (sub-skills + Source
+ description) and README.md (leaf-skill count + domain list).
AL event syntax verified against Microsoft Learn. Samples are
demonstration-only (not compiled by CI). Additive change; no contract change.
Part of #34.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Add 12 general AL event-design articles to events domain
Add 12 atomic knowledge articles under microsoft/knowledge/events covering
general AL event-design best practices: IsHandled initialization and OnAfter
preservation, appending new event parameters, position-based event naming,
reusing/extending events, avoiding per-iteration publishing, Temp-prefixing
temporary record parameters, unabbreviated parameter names, preferring the
this keyword over IncludeSender, avoiding loosely typed parameters, not
mutating existing event contracts, and not bypassing critical operations
with IsHandled. Each article ships a .good.al and .bad.al demonstration
sample (object IDs 50240-50296; not compiled by CI). Extend the
al-events-review leaf Worklist with one targeted check per new rule.
Additive only; no contract or wiring change (events leaf already wired).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Refine events articles after review feedback
Correct wording in five events articles to reflect that AL event
subscribers bind by parameter name, not position:
- add-new-event-parameters-at-the-end: drop the inaccurate claim that
appending a parameter forces subscribers to be updated or causes wrong
values; keep the append-at-end best practice.
- do-not-add-ishandled-to-an-existing-event: reframe from "breaking
change" to the semantic/purpose shift that leaves existing subscribers
pointless; rename the breaking-change keyword to semantic-change.
- name-events-by-publisher-position: extend the good sample with
position-named publishers raised from table and report trigger
contexts.
- initialize-ishandled-to-false-before-publishing: scope the detection
and best practice to events that actually carry a var IsHandled, so an
OnBefore with no IsHandled is not flagged.
- do-not-bypass-critical-operations-with-ishandled: add a litmus-test
definition of a critical operation (code that cannot stand as an
independent, self-contained unit).
Knowledge-only; no contract or wiring change.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Soften Anti Pattern wording in add-new-event-parameters article
Remove the last name-vs-position misconception from the Anti Pattern so it
is consistent with the corrected Description: mid-list insertion is framed
as noisy and harder to review rather than as forcing subscriber re-mapping.
Detection sentence unchanged.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
* Add events domain reviewers to CODEOWNERS
Add @AleksandricMarko and @pchriste-microsoft-com as required reviewers
for the events knowledge domain, matching the existing per-domain expert
ownership convention. Inserted in alphabetical order ahead of the
performance line.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Jesper Schulz-Wedde <jesper.schulzwedde@microsoft.com>
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
