Extract NL customization to object extensions (TrMode)#8933
Open
Alexander-Ya wants to merge 34 commits into
Open
Extract NL customization to object extensions (TrMode)#8933Alexander-Ya wants to merge 34 commits into
Alexander-Ya wants to merge 34 commits into
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
Fixes AB#640601 |
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
Copilot PR ReviewIteration 17 · Outcome: completed Knowledge source: https://github.com/microsoft/BCQuality@186d8a131465475c79244d994acb872cd5c0d4bf Findings by domainFindings split into Knowledge-backed (cite a BCQuality article) and Agent (the agent's own judgement, no matching BCQuality rule).
Totals: 3 knowledge-backed · 0 agent findings. Orchestrator pre-filter (2 file(s) excluded)
Findings produced by the AL review agent v1.7.3. Reply 👎 on any inline comment to flag false positives. |
4 tasks
JesperSchulz
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 30, 2026
The model-reported anchor for a single-line suggestion can be off by more than 8 lines (e.g. PR #8933 VendorNL Confirm() was off by 10, label rename off by 9). Widen the search window to 40 lines either side so the correct target within the same procedure is considered, while the 0.5 similarity floor and 0.1 ambiguity margin keep an unrelated look-alike from winning. Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
JesperSchulz
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 30, 2026
Widening the search window exposed a precision problem: a label-rename suggestion whose added Comment text echoes the field captions at the Error()/Confirm() call site would re-anchor onto the call site (PR #8933 GenJournalLineNL/GeneralLedgerSetupNL 'Text1000000/1' findings), which is worse than the original mis-anchor. Raise the similarity floor to 0.6 and use a bounded window (20). Genuine edit targets - an edited statement or a renamed declaration - score ~0.75-0.99 and re-anchor confidently (the PR #8933 Confirm() findings and the PartnerTypeMismatchMsg->Qst rename now land on the right line). Lower- confidence look-alikes stay below the floor and are suppressed, so the caller posts a manual snippet instead of a wrong auto-applicable anchor. Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
…Extract-NL-customization-to-object-extensions-v2
…Extract-NL-customization-to-object-extensions-v2
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
…Extract-NL-customization-to-object-extensions-v2
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
github-actions
Bot
added
needs-approval
https://github.com/microsoft/BCApps into bugs/Extract-NL-customization-to-object-extensions-v2
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What & why
Linked work
Fixes AB#640601
How I validated this
What I tested and the outcome (required — be specific: scenarios, commands, screenshots for UI changes)
Risk & compatibility