"Create procedure": Handle return value type and length

[NKarolak]

    procedure MyFunction()
    var      
        MyCode5Variable: Code[5];
    begin
        MyCode5Variable := MyNewFunction('CCCCC');     // missing
    end;

"Create procedure":
Currently:

 local procedure MyNewFunction(arg: Text): Variant
    begin
        Error('Procedure not implemented.');
    end;

Expected:

 local procedure MyNewFunction(arg: Text): Code[5]
    begin
        Error('Procedure not implemented.');
    end;

That would be great :)

[DavidFeldhoff]

Thanks :) I'll look into that and keep you posted!

[DavidFeldhoff]

I just tried it with this exact example, but I couldn't reproduce it as it recognizes the return type correctly. It does even work if I create a procedure as a parameter of another procedure call (so that it takes the type of the parameter) or something like that.
What am I doing wrong? :/

[NKarolak]

Interesting...
My code sample was actually a simplification, though close to the original. I will try to reproduce it again tomorrow, maybe it's all about a tiny detail only.

BTW, I often see parameter variable names with spaces = in quotation marks.
Are there any plans to create variable names without spaces, in general?

[DavidFeldhoff]

You mean that the parameters are always created without spaces and without quotation marks?
I could make it happen.. Good idea :)

[NKarolak]

Yes, I would prefer that. And Microsoft apparently too 😉

[DavidFeldhoff]

Okay, I created a separate issue for that, so that we can focus on the issue addressed here. Hope you can find the detail, so that I can fix that :)

[NKarolak]

Wow, this was tricky to find out.

Please try again using this code (yes, just an additional line that is commented out - do not change!):

 procedure MyFunction()
    var
        MyCode5Variable: Code[5];
    begin
        // MyCode5Variable := 'CCCCC'; // <--- new line
        MyCode5Variable := MyNewFunction('CCCCC');     // missing
    end;

[DavidFeldhoff]

Oh.. Nice one 😆
Thanks for keep trying, I'll look into that tomorrow and fix it 👍

[DavidFeldhoff]

Hi Natalie, I fixed it yesterday with v0.2.5.
Furthermore I found another issue: you opened a few days back an issue regarding usage of a table field which is an enum which I fixed (#36 ) But if the enum was used directly, then it was of type variant again. This is now fixed as well.