Microsoft/bcquality
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/microsoft/BCQuality.git synced 2026-08-06 17:36:53 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions
bcquality/microsoft/knowledge/ui/style-expr-text-vs-boolean.md
Jesper Schulz-Wedde a9f3c50863 Regenerate microsoft/knowledge from upstream BCApps instructions 
The previous LLM-generated knowledge files contained factual
hallucinations. The most visible was the claim that `FindFirst` /
`FindLast` "forces a full-table scan" on an unfiltered record - it does
not; those APIs return a single row via the current key.

Other inaccuracies the audit found and fixed:

* `FindSet(true)` was described as "taking a LockTable". The correct
  upstream phrasing is that `FindSet(true)` sets
  `ReadIsolation::UpdLock` on the read. UpdLock and LockTable are
  related but distinct mechanisms.
* The list of production-scale tables had been invented beyond the
  upstream source (e.g. "Detailed Cust. Ledg. Entry") without a
  citation. The regenerated list matches the ten tables upstream lists
  with their P95 row counts.
* `SetLoadFields` guidance had been augmented with an extra mechanism
  claim ("the database resolves the filter using the index without
  hydrating the value") not present in upstream.

Approach: full regeneration of `microsoft/knowledge/` from the six
upstream BCApps Code Review instruction files, with Microsoft Learn /
the AL language reference as a secondary source. Every claim in every
regenerated file is anchored to a verbatim upstream quote (or a Learn
URL); the audit trail lives in artifacts/trace-<domain>.json on the
session workspace.

The PR #11 transaction/error-handling cluster is preserved verbatim:

* performance/understand-implicit-transaction-boundary.md
* performance/codeunit-run-as-atomic-sub-operation.{md,good.al,bad.al}
* performance/codeunit-run-requires-prior-commit-inside-transaction.{md,good.al,bad.al}
* performance/use-tryfunction-for-error-catching-not-rollback.{md,good.al,bad.al}
* performance/avoid-commit-inside-loops.{md,good.al,bad.al}
* security/commitbehavior-attribute-scopes-explicit-commits.{md,good.al,bad.al}
* testing/transactionmodel-attribute-governs-test-transactions.{md,good.al,bad.al}

These articles already cite Microsoft Learn and were carefully
cross-referenced; the regeneration skips their topics rather than
duplicating them.

File counts after regeneration:

  performance   35 .md  (5 preserved + 30 new)
  privacy       17 .md
  security      18 .md  (1 preserved + 17 new)
  style         33 .md
  testing        1 .md  (preserved)
  ui            19 .md
  upgrade       18 .md

Total 141 atomic knowledge files, each strictly one rule. All pass
.github/scripts/validate_frontmatter.py with 0 errors and 0 warnings.

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-05-21 09:53:09 +02:00

1.5 KiB
Raw Blame History

bc-version domain keywords technologies countries application-area
all
ui
style-expr
style
boolean
text-variable
accessibility
al
w1
all

StyleExpr: Boolean toggle vs Text variable

Description

StyleExpr on a page field serves two distinct purposes depending on its type:

  • Boolean — When StyleExpr is a Boolean expression, it controls whether the Style property is applied. In this case the Style property carries the style name; analyze Style and ignore StyleExpr itself.
  • Text — When StyleExpr is a Text variable (e.g. StyleExpr = StatusStyle where StatusStyle: Text and is assigned literals such as 'Favorable'), the variable contains the style name at runtime. There may be no Style property at all — the StyleExpr variable is the style.

When StyleExpr is Text, you must trace the variable's assignments — typically in OnAfterGetRecord or OnAfterGetCurrRecord — to determine which styles can be applied, then apply the same accessibility rules as for a literal Style value.

Best Practice

Inspect the declared type of the symbol referenced by StyleExpr before drawing conclusions. If it is Boolean, evaluate the Style property. If it is Text, follow every assignment to the variable and check the full set of possible style values against cosmetic-styles-need-no-textual-context.md and semantic-styles-need-independent-textual-meaning.md.

See sample: style-expr-text-vs-boolean.good.al.