Skip to content
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

Resolve ambiguous description on Rule0031 #787

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 13, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion BusinessCentral.LinterCop/LinterCop.ruleset.json
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -155,7 +155,7 @@
{
"id": "LC0031",
"action": "Info",
"justification": "Set ReadIsolation property instead of LockTable method."
"justification": "Use ReadIsolation instead of LockTable."
},
{
"id": "LC0032",
Expand Down
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions BusinessCentral.LinterCop/LinterCopAnalyzers.resx
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -382,13 +382,13 @@
<value>Set Access property to Internal for Install/Upgrade codeunits.</value>
</data>
<data name="Rule0031RecordInstanceIsolationLevelTitle" xml:space="preserve">
<value>Set ReadIsolation property instead of LockTable method.</value>
<value>Use ReadIsolation instead of LockTable.</value>
</data>
<data name="Rule0031RecordInstanceIsolationLevelFormat" xml:space="preserve">
<value>Set ReadIsolation property instead of LockTable method.</value>
<value>Use ReadIsolation(IsolationLevel::UpdLock) instead of LockTable().</value>
</data>
<data name="Rule0031RecordInstanceIsolationLevelDescription" xml:space="preserve">
<value>Set ReadIsolation property instead of LockTable method.</value>
<value>Use the ReadIsolation method to control isolation level on database transactions instead of the LockTable method.</value>
</data>
<data name="Rule0032ClearCodeunitSingleInstanceTitle" xml:space="preserve">
<value>Clear(All) does not affect or change values for global variables in '{0}: Codeunit {1}'.</value>
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion README.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ For an example and the default values see: [LinterCop.ruleset.json](LinterCop.ru
|[LC0028](https://github.com/StefanMaron/BusinessCentral.LinterCop/wiki/LC0028)|Event subscriber arguments now use identifier syntax instead of string literals.|Info|
|[LC0029](https://github.com/StefanMaron/BusinessCentral.LinterCop/wiki/LC0029)|Use `CompareDateTime` method in `Type Helper` codeunit for DateTime variable comparisons.|Info|
|[LC0030](https://github.com/StefanMaron/BusinessCentral.LinterCop/wiki/LC0030)|Set Access property to Internal for Install/Upgrade codeunits.|Info|
|[LC0031](https://github.com/StefanMaron/BusinessCentral.LinterCop/wiki/LC0031)|Set ReadIsolation property instead of LockTable method.|Info|
|[LC0031](https://github.com/StefanMaron/BusinessCentral.LinterCop/wiki/LC0031)|Use ReadIsolation instead of LockTable.|Info|
|[LC0032](https://github.com/StefanMaron/BusinessCentral.LinterCop/wiki/LC0032)|Clear(All) does not affect or change values for global variables in single instance codeunits.|Warning|
|[LC0033](https://github.com/StefanMaron/BusinessCentral.LinterCop/wiki/LC0033)|The specified runtime version in app.json is falling behind.|Info|
|[LC0034](https://github.com/StefanMaron/BusinessCentral.LinterCop/wiki/LC0034)|The property `Extensible` should be explicitly set for public objects.|Disabled|
Expand Down