mirror of
https://github.com/microsoft/BCQuality.git
synced 2026-10-05 14:46:55 +01:00
3842ef7138
- 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>
26 lines
2.4 KiB
Markdown
26 lines
2.4 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
bc-version: [all]
|
|
domain: testing
|
|
keywords: [bcpt, performance-test, scenarios, app-specific, regression]
|
|
technologies: [al]
|
|
countries: [w1]
|
|
application-area: [all]
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Include app-specific scenarios in a PerformanceTest app's BCPT suite
|
|
|
|
## Description
|
|
|
|
A PerformanceTest app that ships with only the generic Microsoft BCPT samples (creating sales orders, purchase orders, posting item journals) measures Business Central's own baseline performance, not the extension it was built to test. Those samples are starting points, not coverage. Without a scenario that exercises the extension's own business flow — its own codeunits, its own FlowFields, its own page rendering — a performance regression introduced by the extension has no test that would ever detect it.
|
|
|
|
## Best Practice
|
|
|
|
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`.
|
|
|
|
## Anti Pattern
|
|
|
|
A PerformanceTest app whose only scenario codeunits are copies of Microsoft's shipped samples (creating a standard sales order, opening the standard customer list) tests the platform, not the extension. Any regression in the extension's own posting logic, calculations, or pages goes unmeasured and unnoticed.
|
|
|
|
See sample: `bcpt-scenarios-must-be-app-specific.bad.al`.
|