[Event Request] codeunit 22 "Item Jnl.-Post Line" procedure CheckExpirationDate event OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot

[kmistrytnp]

Why do you need this change?

I would like an additional var parameter called SkipNewExpirationDateCheck added to the OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot event, and if this is set to true by the subscriber, to then skip the TestField on the "New Expiration Date" field

Note: As this is an integration event, adding extra parameters is not a breaking change, and existing subscribers will be unaffected

Describe the request

Existing code

OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot(SumLot, SignFactor, TempTrackingSpecification);
if (SumOfEntries > 0) and
   ((SumOfEntries <> SumLot) or (TempTrackingSpecification."New Lot No." <> TempTrackingSpecification."Lot No.")
   or (TempTrackingSpecification."New Package No." <> TempTrackingSpecification."Package No."))
then
    TempTrackingSpecification.TestField("New Expiration Date", ExistingExpirationDate);

Amended/Proposed Code

SkipNewExpirationDateCheck := false;
OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot(SumLot, SignFactor, TempTrackingSpecification, SkipNewExpirationDateCheck);
if (not SkipNewExpirationDateCheck) and (SumOfEntries > 0) and
   ((SumOfEntries <> SumLot) or (TempTrackingSpecification."New Lot No." <> TempTrackingSpecification."Lot No.")
   or (TempTrackingSpecification."New Package No." <> TempTrackingSpecification."Package No."))
then
    TempTrackingSpecification.TestField("New Expiration Date", ExistingExpirationDate);

Current event signature

[IntegrationEvent(false, false)]
local procedure OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot(var SumLot: Decimal; SignFactor: Integer; var TempTrackingSpecification: Record "Tracking Specification" temporary)
begin
end;

Updated event signature

[IntegrationEvent(false, false)]
local procedure OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot(var SumLot: Decimal; SignFactor: Integer; var TempTrackingSpecification: Record "Tracking Specification" temporary; var SkipNewExpirationDateCheck: Boolean)
begin
end;

Internal work item: AB#642607

[github-actions]

Hi @kmistrytnp,

Thank you for your extensibility request. To help us process it efficiently, please update the issue to include the required information.

📚 Extensibility Guidelines

Missing Information:

• alternatives_evaluated: Which existing events or alternative approaches were evaluated, and why they are insufficient for this scenario.
• justification_for_ishandled: Why bypassing/skipping the standard expiration-date validation is necessary instead of using a regular event or redesign.
• performance_considerations: A brief note on expected execution frequency and performance impact.
• data_sensitivity_review: A short statement confirming whether any sensitive data exposure is involved.
• multi_extension_interaction: A brief note on possible multi-extension subscriber conflicts and any mitigation considerations.

Please update the issue with the missing details. We'll automatically re-analyze once updated.

Note

Automatically generated by the Triage Agent — advisory only. An engineer will review before any action is taken.

Tip

Not accurate? Reply with /not-accurate (optional: add a short explanation). Your feedback improves future responses.

[kmistrytnp]

alternatives_evaluated:
I have considered using the OnBeforeCheckExpirationDate event which has an IsHandled param, but this would mean that I would need to replicate a lot of standard BC code - the whole procedure pretty much. This would then break any existing extensions which have subscribed to any of the following events which occur further down in the code:

• OnCheckExpirationDateOnBeforeAssignExpirationDate
• OnCheckExpirationDateOnBeforeTestFieldExpirationDate
• OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot

There is no other alternative available, hence the minor event change request I have made

justification_for_ishandled:
This is the safest option available which doesn't break any other extensions. The only effect of the SkipNewExpirationDateCheck or IsHandled param is to bypass the single TestField - which is exactly what is required

performance_considerations:
No performance impact

data_sensitivity_review:
No additional data is exposed

multi_extension_interaction:
Having this event change makes it safer for multi extension interaction. As explained above, not having this change made means that the OnBeforeCheckExpirationDate (with the IsHandled) event has to be used and this would affect other extensions subscribing to these events...

• OnCheckExpirationDateOnBeforeAssignExpirationDate
• OnCheckExpirationDateOnBeforeTestFieldExpirationDate
• OnCheckExpirationDateOnAfterCalcSumLot

[github-actions]

Hi @kmistrytnp,

Thank you for your extensibility request. Unfortunately, this request cannot be implemented.

Reason: This request cannot be approved. Adding an IsHandled pattern to an existing event is not allowed because it fundamentally changes the event's purpose and contract. Existing subscribers rely on the current behavior, and introducing IsHandled would break them by allowing the base logic to be bypassed — something the original subscribers were never designed to account for.

If you need bypass/handled functionality, please request a NEW separate event with IsHandled instead of modifying the existing one.

Note

Automatically generated by the Triage Agent — advisory only. An engineer will review before any action is taken.

Tip

Not accurate? Reply with /not-accurate (optional: add a short explanation). Your feedback improves future responses.

[kmistrytnp]

/not-accurate - the only thing this specific IsHandled parameter will do is bypass the single TestField which is exactly what is required.

As explained in detail above, this will not break anything and in fact makes it much safer than using the existing OnBeforeCheckExpirationDate event - please see detailed analysis/explanation on previous comment

[github-actions]

✅ Feedback recorded
Thanks — your /not-accurate feedback has been logged and will be reviewed.

[AleksandricMarko]

Hi @kmistrytnp,

It is true IsHandled is not breaking change, but it changes a purpose of the event, so we decided to limit this kind of update of existing events. Please consider an option using any other events or request new one

[kmistrytnp]

I understand but in this case all it is doing is bypassing a single TestField statement which is why I suggested it is called SkipNewExpirationDateCheck.

Please see my earlier detailed message - the only other option I have is to use the OnBeforeCheckExpirationDate but this means that several events in the procedure will then not be called and there is a chance that this will break other extensions.

Implementing my request means that other extension are unaffected - isn't this what you are also trying to achieve by limiting IsHandled? I understand in general that adding IsHandled can bypass large chunks of code (like the existing OnBeforeCheckExpirationDate event) - and this is exactly what I want to avoid this by requesting the SkipNewExpirationDateCheck parameter.

Please reconsider adding the SkipNewExpirationDateCheck parameter - it is not bypassing lots of code, it is simply skipping a single TestField - there are no side effects for other extensions.

Please review my earlier detailed posts for a detailed explanation on why adding this parameter is safer then not having it.