-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 241
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
AA0232 The FlowField XXX of "TableName" should be added to the SIFT key. #6140
Comments
I can verify that I have the same issue with the rule. |
It seems this is also another warning that fires for keys that exist in the base application but to which we cannot add SumIndexFields, which it should not do until we can add them... no point telling us 'you should do X' when you don't let us ;-) |
I can also confirm that this is still creating false errors. |
Slightly different twist (I think): tableextension 50000 "My Purch. Inv. Line" extends "Purch. Inv. Line" Above code leads to an error: "The property 'SumIndexFields' can only be set if the specified fields are from the same table.", Fair enough. But in another table linking to field in this table extension I get the AA0232 warning, that Quantity must be included in SIFT. |
Hello @PaulIvan, is there any progress on this and generally any ETA? |
Any progress? |
Anything happening with this? This warning is very useful when it acts correctly, but with all the false warnings and the fact it isn't even recognizing the things I'm fixing I am afraid I have to disable this rule, which is a huge shame. |
Still hoping for an update on the status of this. |
The false warnings are still there. Waiting for a solution.. |
I want an ETA as much as anyone else, but each of our comments like this just sends another useless email to 18 people... Let's just upvote the original post and the replies that say what we want, instead of repeating things over and over again. |
I know Repos where Issues that no longer get comments are removed because of "not relevant" or "looks like resolved". |
I have this problem as well. |
Also having this problem |
Still seeing this problem! |
Me too on v9.0.611415. But it does not always pop up. Can't figure out why it is like this on some fields, but on others that looks exactly the same it does not show up. |
Status update please! |
Yeah.. this is still broken over two years after it was reported the first time.. |
Thanks for reporting this issue. Sorry we haven’t completed it yet, but we’ve had to prioritize elsewhere. We’re planning to give the CodeCop engine and its rules an overhaul in a future major release. Thanks for your patience. |
Status update please! |
I think it's not necessary to add additional information. Microsoft does not fix any of these CodeCop warnings soon as it is not their priority. |
@mazhelez Now that there is an example to reproduce it, and knowing that this bug still applies, could you consider reopening the ticket? Even if you don't plan to fix it now, at least to make it clear that it still is a problem. |
Still not fixed. |
Still not solution. |
Does anyone knows something about that? |
The status of this issue is "Closed", which means that Microsoft won't ever look again into it. |
Still not Fixed. I am getting same warning in case of average based flow field. |
Still broken FOUR years after it was reported the first time.. |
@ashishsharmainecta , @navdotnetreqs , Best is to create a new issue if you would like to raise new attention to it.. . |
Describe the bug
The rule does not seem to be working correctly.
To Reproduce
We haven't been able to reproduce it outside our app (a test app using the same VSCode extension and BC server, with identical code as the one below does not raise the warning). There is something else that I must be missing, but I'm posting it here to see if we can find what.
This is, after a few simplifications, the code I've left in one table field (the original CalcFormula was much more complex):
It raises this warning: The FlowField Quantity of "IDPWHS Read Buffer" should be added to the SIFT key.
This is the key I've created for that CalcFormula, in the "IDPWHS Read Buffer" table:
Just for reference, this are the "Doc No." and "Quantity" fields:
Expected behavior
There is a SIFT index for the required key and the Quantity field, so no warnings should be raised.
5. Versions:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: