InsertAllowed = ModifyAllowed = DeleteAllowed = false => Editable = false

[jhoek]

Would this perhaps be a rule that you're willing to consider for LinterCop?

If a page has InsertAllowed = false, ModifyAllowed = false and DeleteAllowed = false, that combination of properties is functionally equivalent to Editable = false, but the latter more clearly expresses the developer's intent.

[Arthurvdv]

Good idea, I'll have a look into it

[pri-kise]

Currently we use explicit those properties to ensure that PageExtensions don't change our intent.

Editable can be changed by extensions, but the properties InsertAllowed and so on cannot be changed.

Additionally I think it's necessary to set InsertAllowed to false on API Pages, that you don't have to set DelayedInsert to true.

[Arthurvdv]

Thank you for that insight @pri-kise, I didn't realize that you could change the Editable property with an page extensions.

I personally didn't encounter any use cases where the page has Editable = false and an extension would like to change this to true. So I could use some help here on how to go forward on this.

We could make the rule, in case the Extensible = false property also is set, then raise the rule as described here. Let me show this with some examples:

page 50100 MyPage
{
    // Raise a rule to adapt to Editable = false;
    InsertAllowed = false;
    ModifyAllowed = false;
    DeleteAllowed = false;
    Extensible = false;
}

page 50100 MyPage
{
    // Do not raise a rule (this prohibits an page extension to change these properties)
    InsertAllowed = false;
    ModifyAllowed = false;
    DeleteAllowed = false;
    Extensible = true; // The default is true, so not explicit declaring this property here is the same
}

page 50100 MyPage
{
    // Do not raise a rule (page can not be extended)
    Editable = false;
    Extensible = false;
}

page 50100 MyPage
{
    // Raise a rule to adapt to Insert/Modified/Delete to prevent an page extension to change these properties
    Editable = false;
    Extensible = true;
}

In combination with LC0034 - The property Extensible should be explicitly set for public objects. this rule could make sense.

But to be honest I'm doubting a bit here, because of the default true value of the Extensible property, this rule wil in most cases don't show up and defeats the purpose?

The rule would even do the opposite I think; Modifying from Editable to Allow (to prevent a possible page extension to change the behavior).

[rvanbekkum]

I have ran into something that was very similar:

In my scenario the page had DeleteAllowed = true; and Editable = false;
The Editable property wins (deletion is not allowed) and so the DeleteAllowed = true; property does not have any effect.

I think that this example could still be a separate rule which could raise a diagnostic that informs the developer that setting Editable = false; contradicts the setting of Delete/Modify/InsertAllowed = true;

[Pazzakara]

Having the 3 properties (InsertAllowed, DeleteAllowed, ModifyAllowed) set to false is NOT the same like Editable = false.
The 3 properies only apply to fields that show fields of the source table record. The Editable property applies to all fields, including fields with a global variable as source expression.
ExamplePage.txt
I'd aggree to rvanbekkum and say it could be useful to have a rule like: if Editable is set to false then the other 3 properties are redundant (i.e. they should not be set, neither to true nor to false).

[jwikman]

One more thing to consider, even if you set Editable = false, some system actions (new/delete) are visible (but disabled) if you do not set them explicit to false.
For that reason, we have several pages with:

    DeleteAllowed = false;
    Editable = false;
    InsertAllowed = false;

I see that we also have ModifyAllowed = false together with Editable = false; in some listparts, but unsure if that was really needed. I don't have the time to deep dive into it right now, but wanted to let you know about this now anyway, so you do not raise a warning for these scenarios (even though I do not see that happen in your examples). 🙂