• Introducing Dark Mode! Switch by clicking on the lightbulb icon next to Search or by clicking on Default style at the bottom left of the page!

Renaming BSFN Data Structure Members

Zoltan_Gyimesi

Legendary Poster
Hi Forum/List,

I amn't able to rename the BSFN data structure members after I saved the DSTR object and reopenned it with its designer.
It happens on XE SP 14.

I am able to do it on B7331 SP 6.

Is it OW version and/or SP level dependent?
Do you know any ESU/ASU/SP which correct this problem?

Thanks the replies in advance,
Zoltán

B7332 SP11, ESU 4116422, Intel NT4, SQL 7 SP1
(working with B7321, B7331, XE too)
 

Christian Audet

Moderator
Staff member
Zoltan,

I have tested it in B733.2 SP11 and it's the same also (i'm not able to edit the parameters). Since Data structure are edited by "DSFORM4.EXE" there is two possibility.

1st : The executable don't have the posibility anymore to modify existing DSTR parameters
2nd : The P9860 who's calling "DSFORM4.EXE" is not receiving the same parameters in your B733.1 version than in Xe. There is 3 possible parameters to "DSFORM4.EXE".

Can you check in your B733.1 version what is the call from P9860 to "DSFORM4.EXE", mine is (<Blank>,"DSFORM4.EXE",VA evt_DesignParam1, "-t3",<Blank>,<Blank>).

If the call to this program is the same from B733.1 SP6 and Xe then we can conclude that the change is in "DSFORM4.EXE" and the only way to change that will be to receive a new Service Pack.

I'm sure you know this but when I want to change the name of a parameters I just delete old parameters and re-insert them with different name. Make sure you change the .h file of your "C" business function after the change and that you rebuild other business function that use this DSTR.

Give me some news about it !

Christian Audet

Implementing B7333 (Xe) SP14.1, SQL
(Support B732, B7331 and B7332)
 

Zoltan_Gyimesi

Legendary Poster
Hi Christian,

Thank you for your reply.

I checked in our B733.1 SP 6 version what is the call from P9860 to "DSFORM4.EXE". Unfortunately It is exactly the same: (<Blank>,"DSFORM4.EXE",VA evt_DesignParam1, "-t3",<Blank>,<Blank>).

The value of "VA evt_DesignParam1" holds only concat("-id",[FC Object Name]), so it isn't relevant.

Thank for the hint anyway.

Yesterday I reported this issue to the JDE Response Line. Currently I am in the second round after I clarified what is my problem and described step to step the way how to reproduce it (including all OMW related circumstances like environment, project status, my user role, Check-Out status, token holding, etc. :)

Now I am waiting for the answer.
In the first round they missunderstood my problem a bit, they thought that I have problem with renaming a business function data structure, instead with renaming a MEMBER of it.

I will let you and the Forum/List know when I will receive any reportable answer.

About the deletion method: Yes, I know it and hate it.

Regards,
Zoltán

B7332 SP11, ESU 4116422, Intel NT4, SQL 7 SP1
(working with B7321, B7331, XE too)
 

Christian Audet

Moderator
Staff member
Zoltan,

I hate the deletion method also !

keep us inform !

Christian

Implementing B7333 (Xe) SP14.1, SQL
(Support B732, B7331 and B7332)
 

Zoltan_Gyimesi

Legendary Poster
Hi Christian,
You asked me keep you informed. Here is third round
==================From Response Line==================================
.....
Works as designed. If the you need to change the logical name of a data
structure member, the member needs to be deleted and then re-added.

This is how it works now in Xe.

Let me know if you have any questions.
.....
======================================================================
... Of course, I had had question....
================Back To Response Line=================================
...
I have just one question and a comment.
The question is:
What is the reason of this modification?
The comment is:
The deletion method is not really acceptable. When you try to delete a member in the structure then the following warning pops up (please, see in the attached Word document).
Do I have to take it seriously? If I delete and re-add a member then I have to revise all refence in the Business Function, further revise all call of this Business Function and correct them when necessary. This is the reason, why my oppinion is that this solution is not acceptable.

Please, let me know your opinion.
...
======================================================================

Here we are.

Regards,
Zoltán
P.S.: I have attached the Warning to this post on the Forum too (of course, I have ZIP-ped it :)))


B7332 SP11, ESU 4116422, Intel NT4, SQL 7 SP1
(working with B7321, B7331, XE too)
 

Attachments

Christian Audet

Moderator
Staff member
Zoltan,

In my case I did it with several "CUSTOM DSTR" used by "CUSTOM FUNCTION" and I got no error. The only thing that I did after the rename was to re-include the DSTR typedef into my C program.

I thing that the re-include of the "typedef" in your .h is the only important thing for C Business Function, since I did it several time. But for application and report calling this function I agree with you when you say "have to revise all refence in the Business Function".

The DSTR that you were talking about is it custom DSTR called by a custom APPL or UBE?

Thanks !

Christian Audet

Implementing B7333 (Xe) SP14.1, SQL
(Support B732, B7331 and B7332)
 

Zoltan_Gyimesi

Legendary Poster
Hi Christian,
You asked me keep you informed. Here is forth (and last) round
==================From Response Line==================================
.....
The reason for the modification is bacause it was not working correctly in
the previous versions. They changed it so that spec corruption would not
occur for the data structure.

The message you get is a warning. It is giving you that warning because
making this type of change at the data structure level could affect many
business functions and applications. You should not worry about it if you
are changing your own data structure since you will know where it is being
used. You should worry about it if you are changing a standard JDE data
structure since this can cause many busniess funnctions and applications to
fail. That is why we always recommend to never change a standard JDE object.
.....
======================================================================
No comment.
Zoltán




B7332 SP11, ESU 4116422, Intel NT4, SQL 7 SP1
(working with B7321, B7331, XE too)
 

Christian Audet

Moderator
Staff member
Zoltan,

I think that we will leave with it like that !

Thank you for the reply.

Christian

Implementing B7333 (Xe) SP14.1, SQL
(Support B732, B7331 and B7332)
 
Top