Code Inspector checks on SM30 - Warning in standard code

[SimoneMilesi]

Hi all!

i'm working on a system where TRs need to pass Code Inspector checks in order to be released: so far, so good.

The problem I'm facing is... the checks are preventing me release a CR because it contains some SM30 generated FM pools, hinting issues in standard code!

Has anyone already faced this issue?

[matt]

Oh look. A broken process! 🙂

[SimoneMilesi]

matthew.billingham i'm SO tempted to step in and add an #EC in the standard code!

>_<

[former_member259807]

Hi Simone,

not really a solution, but are you not 'able' to execute the ATC check with the option 'Analyse Generated Table Maintenance Objects' off?

The screen error will not appear then....

[SimoneMilesi]

b.wallagh i'm not authorized to change the settings, since it's customer's system with a strict policy.

For this specific case, I explained the issue and I think (and hope) they'll disable the check for a short moment so I can go on with the release.

I fear the moment I have to change any field on those tables!

[former_member259807]

hmmm.... well, I would try and persuade them. The checkbox is for SAP generated SM30 coding only and as you say, every time you make a change to the table and re-generate.....

The F1 help says 'The default value is not to analyze generated code of table maintenance.'

(I'm only trying to find you ammunition 😉 )

[RaymondGiuseppi]

Request customer for an enlarged budget to develop a maintenance program and no longer use SM30... 😉

[matt]

Off topic, but this reminds me of when I started at a new client and they had their own version of ATC (before ATC was invented). I had to do the training.

During which, I not only noticed that I'd be responsible at another place for this ATC-like tool being developed, but the training material was largely what I'd written!

A consultancy (and I know which partner did it), lifted the code from the place where I made it happen (I was a manager then), and took it, as they say here, across the river...

[matt]

raymond.giuseppi I've even done that. The client specified they didn't want SM30, they wanted editable ALV.

I wrote a nice framework for it. For each table, just create a new implementation of an interface. So after the first one, it's was about 2 hours to make each subsequent one.

[crosenbe]

Dear Mr. Milesi,

if I understand your issue correctly, you refer to Code Inspector checks utilized as part of an ATC check? Although I do not know your system credentials (NW release etc.), but please have a look at note 2623855, it might refer to the described issue

Best regards,

Christian Rosenberger

[SimoneMilesi]

Oh gosh!
i'm trouble, right? None calls me Mr Milesi if not to scold me! 😉

I am (was) on S/4 1709 and I'll pass the note to the system administrators, thanks!