If local procedure is not used, then no code analysis is performed on its further implementation

[rvanbekkum]

Edited Description (23-03-2022):

If a local procedure is not used, then no code analysis is applied to its implementation.

Original description:

Title A new code analysis rule that warns developers if arguments for values for label placeholders are missing where they would be expected.

Description If there is a label with placeholders then when it is used in procedures/methods like StrSubstNo, Message and Error, a code analysis rule would warn developers when there are insufficient arguments as values for the placeholders in the label.

Reason for the rule It is hard to spot this error, you typically only find out about it later at runtime.

Bad code sample Example of what bad code the rule should catch:

local procedure MyProcedure()
var
    MyText: Text;
    MyLabelMsg: Label 'This is my message with some placeholders: %1 %2', Comment = '%1 = Placeholder A; %2 = Placeholder B';
    MyLabelErr: Label 'This is my error with some placeholders: %1 %2', Comment = '%1 = Placeholder A; %2 = Placeholder B';
begin
    MyText := StrSubstNo(MyLabelMsg); // Missing values for %1 and %2
    Message(MyLabelMsg, 1); // Missing values for %1 and %2 for Message
    Error(MyLabelErr, 1, 2, 3); // Too many values, i.e., no %3 in the label but a third argument is passed
end;

Good code sample Example of what code should look like:

local procedure MyProcedure()
var
    MyText: Text;
    MyLabelMsg: Label 'This is my message with some placeholders: %1 %2', Comment = '%1 = Placeholder A; %2 = Placeholder B';
    MyLabelErr: Label 'This is my error with some placeholders: %1 %2', Comment = '%1 = Placeholder A; %2 = Placeholder B';
begin
    MyText := StrSubstNo(MyLabelMsg, 1, 2);
    Message(MyLabelMsg, 1, 2);
    Error(MyLabelErr, 1, 2);
end;

[rvanbekkum]

Related to #6456

[rvanbekkum]

I think this should already work through AA0131, but it does not with the latest AL Language Extension (6.5.413786).

[rvanbekkum]

I see: if the procedure is not used yet, then no further static code analysis is applied to its implementation. Maybe this is by design though. If that is the case, then we can simply close this issue.

[rvanbekkum]

Updated the title accordingly.

[mazhelez]

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.