Skip to main content

The troubles of extending/correcting a lookup doing a wrong filter when the lookup is based on table relations

 Working in the WHS module a customer needed to be able to change the transport provider (carrier) and the provided service (carrier service) directly on the Shipment chosen in the pack form.

This presents some interesting challenges, working within the limits of the extension mechanisms in D365.

Firstly as of time of writing the application implements a table relation on the WHSShipment table to the table TMSCarrierService (transport service codes provided by a carrier).

It does so by having a Normal field relation between TMSCarrierService.CarrierServiceCode and WHSShipmenttable.CarrierServiceCode, thus NOT taking in to consideration the Carrier that have been chosen on the shipment.




Trouble is that you can not change a table relation using extensions, AND you can not using extensions to introduce a new (correct) relation that overrides the existing one.

So instead of just changing the table relation (if that was possible and simple), I needed to do 4 extensions.

1) A new class with a formDataSource extension on form WHSPack, that unlocks the datasource which is actually non-editable, then locking all fields other than CarrierCode and CarrierServiceCode:

    /// <summary>
    /// Extension of active method on WHSShipmentTable datasource
    /// </summary>
    /// <returns>int</returns>
    int active()
    {
        FormDataSource shipmentFDS = this;
        FormDataObject fob;

        int noOfFieldsInDS,field,fieldID;
        DictTable shipmentDT;

        int ret = next active();

        shipmentDT = new DictTable(shipmentFDS.table());
        noOfFieldsInDS = shipmentDT.fieldCnt(TableScope::CurrentTableOnly);

        shipmentFDS.allowEdit(true);
        for(field=1;field <= noOfFieldsInDS;field++)
        {
            fieldID = shipmentDT.fieldCnt2Id(field);
            fob = shipmentFDS.object(fieldID);
            if (fieldId != fieldNum(WHSShipmentTable,CarrierCode) && fieldId != fieldNum(WHSShipmentTable,CarrierServiceCode))
            {
                if (shipmentFDS.object(fieldID))
                {
                    shipmentFDS.object(fieldID).allowEdit(false);
                }
            }
            else
            {
                if (shipmentFDS.object(fieldID))
                {
                    shipmentFDS.object(fieldID).allowEdit(true);
                }
            }
        }
        return ret;
    }

Now we see that the lookup on CarrierServiceCode is NOT filtered by the chosen Carrier, so what to do ?

2) A new class with a table extension on WHSShipmentTable that implemented a new edit method

[ExtensionOf(tableStr(WHSShipmentTable))]
final class HAINWHSShipmentTable_Extension
{
    public edit TMSCarrierServiceCode editCarrierServiceCode(boolean _set, TMSCarrierServiceCode _carrierServiceCode)
    {
        if (_set)
        {
            ttsbegin;
            this.CarrierServiceCode = _carrierServiceCode;
            this.update();
            ttscommit;
        }
        else
        {
            _carrierServiceCode = WHSShipmentTable::find(this.ShipmentId).CarrierServiceCode;
        }
        return _carrierServiceCode;
    }

}

3) A form extension that disables and makes the WHSShipmentTable_CarrierServiceCode field invisible, and introduces the edit-method from step 2 into the form design, remembering to set the 'Lookup button' property to value 'Always'

4) A class with EventHandlers for lookup on the new field using the edit-method from step 2 and OnModified-event on the CarrierCode field to clear the CarrierServiceCode field when CarrierCode is changed:

/// <summary>
/// Event handler for "over riding" default lookup on TMSCarrierService which is wrong due to table relation between WHSShipmentTable and TMSCarrierService
/// having only CarrierServiceCode defined - not taking in to consideration that a CarrierCode might be present - which SHOULD filter lookup on the chosen carrier
/// So normal field is disabled and a field based on a edit method is introduced, and this is handler helps making the correct lookup (filtered on chosen carrier)
/// </summary>
class HAINWHSPackFormCarrierServiceCodeLookup_EventHandler
{
    

    /// <summary>
    ///
    /// </summary>
    /// <param name="sender"></param>
    /// <param name="e"></param>
    [FormControlEventHandler(formControlStr(WHSPack, editCarrierServiceCode), FormControlEventType::Lookup)]
    public static void editCarrierServiceCode_OnLookup(FormControl _sender, FormControlEventArgs _e)
    {
        Query query;
        QueryBuildDataSource qbds;
        SysTableLookup sysTableLookup;
        FormControlCancelableSuperEventArgs event;
        TMSCarrierCode chosenCarrier;

        event = _e as FormControlCancelableSuperEventArgs;
        chosenCarrier = _sender.formRun().design().controlname(formControlStr(WHSPack,WHSShipmentTable_CarrierCode)).valueStr();

        query = new Query();   
        qbds = query.addDataSource(tableNum(TMSCarrierService));
        if (chosenCarrier)
        {
            qbds.addRange(fieldNum(TMSCarrierService,CarrierCode)).value(queryValue(chosenCarrier));
        }
        sysTableLookup = SysTableLookup::newParameters(tableNum(TMSCarrierService),_sender);
        sysTableLookup.addLookupfield(fieldNum(TMSCarrierService,CarrierServiceCode));
        sysTableLookup.addLookupfield(fieldNum(TMSCarrierService,Name));
        sysTableLookup.parmQuery(query);
        sysTableLookup.performFormLookup();
        event.CancelSuperCall();
    }

    /// <summary>
    ///
    /// </summary>
    /// <param name="sender"></param>
    /// <param name="e"></param>
    [FormDataFieldEventHandler(formDataFieldStr(WHSPack, WHSShipmentTable, CarrierCode), FormDataFieldEventType::Modified)]
    public static void CarrierCode_OnModified(FormDataObject sender, FormDataFieldEventArgs e)
    {
        WHSShipmentTable shipment;
        shipment = sender.datasource().cursor() as WHSShipmentTable;
        shipment.CarrierServiceCode = '';
        shipment.update();
        sender.datasource().reread();

    }

}

If only you could add fields to table relations, or at least make a new relation that replaces the default one.


Sometimes I miss the old days, where thing could be overridden. ;-)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Suppressing the infolog

Supressing the infolog is often useful in D365FO when augmenting code. When augmenting code using COC (Chain Of Command), you can have new code run either before or after the code you are augmenting. This means that any infolog-messages that the standard application code does, will be shown to the user, even if your augmentation supports a scenario where there must be no infolog-messages. How do you avoid the standard application infolog-messages ? To the rescue comes temporary supression of the infolog. The suppression consists of: 1) Saving the current infologLevel 2) Setting the infologLevel to SysInfologLevel::None 3) Run your code 4) Restoring the saved infologLevel to the infolog For example a table could have a validatewrite-method that validates that you are only allowed to use 3 out of 6 options in an enum-field, and you need to allow for a fourth one. Table a - validateWrite method: boolean validateWrite() {     Switch (this.enumField)     {     ...
Post a Comment
Read more

ProcessGuide framework

I was tasked with developing a custom "process" for printing ad hoc labels in the Dynamics 365SCM WHS app. WHS process guide - development docs Reading the great articles from 1clickfactory (starting point  https://www.1clickfactory.com/blog/advanced-whs-mobile-device-development-part-1-process-guide-framework/) gives a good starting point. Especially Edgaras' tip on running  SysExtensionCache::clearAllScopes();  in a runnable class after introducing a new step/pagebuilder class combination  is VERY useful. And of course Microsoft's own documentation ( https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/supply-chain/warehousing/process-guide-framework ) also helps. However, I wanted to chip in with a couple of things. Extending WHS base enums If you extend the WHSActivity, WHSWorkExecuteMode or WHSWorktransType base enums with new options it is a good idea to run a database synchronization when you are done with extending them. Otherwise you might be frustrated to find, th...
1 comment
Read more

Dynamics AX 2012 ValidTimeState tables and form changing view from current to all

Valid Time State tables are new i AX 2012 a gives the developer the possibility to easily create tables that hold e.g. current setup data for various purposes, and at the same time keeping a "history" of the changes of the data in the table. For more reading: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg861781.aspx I was tasked with doing a setup table with rates for calculating Vendor Bonus and I chose to base this a valid time state table. The customer asked for a button on the form, where you maintain the vendor bonus calculation setup data, so you could toggle viewing "Current setup" or "All setup" records (changing the view from actual to all records and vice versa in the form). I found that you can not change the ValidTimeStateAutoQuery property on the form data source in a form at run-time. It simply does not change anything, so I came up with the following solution: A boolean class member in the classdeclation method of the form: boolean ...
Post a Comment
Read more