B2026-042-Fix-Null-Error-for-Set_At_All_Level-in-the-Applicability-tab-evaluate-having-the-button-grayed-out-for-the-RNO-column-4 #762
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Delete Branch "B2026-042-Fix-Null-Error-for-Set_At_All_Level-in-the-Applicability-tab-evaluate-having-the-button-grayed-out-for-the-RNO-column-4"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
B2026-042-Fix-Null-Error-for-Set_At_All_Level-in-the-Applicability-tab-evaluate-having-the-button-grayed-out-for-the-RNO-column-4
With both if statements --- if it is null, do we want it enabled or not?
currently, it wouldn't hit either statement?
@@ -403,3 +406,3 @@{if (this.Visible == false) return;if (_MyItemInfo.IsRNOPart == true) // Check if step is an RNO disable "Set All To Level" button.if (MyItemInfo != null)Also, I am not sure how this would ever get hit as isn't this basically the same check as line 405?
in addition to Matt's comment, the MyItemInfo references should be "_MyItemInfo" as we are in the Set portion of "MyItemInfo". All of the other references in this Set code use "_MyItemInfo".
The default is enabled. If there _MyItemInfo is null, then the users have not entered a step yet.
As mentioned above this 2nd if statement that you added is unnecessary - I took a screenshot and attached here to re-illustrate. The part with a purple square is unnecessary because that is already done by the part in the red square.
Please let me know if you have any questions - I did a screenshot of the code to re-illustrate.
With latest change, looks good to me. Ready for QA!
looks good.
Tested with 2.3.2605.409 and found two issues - discussed with software, created videos and reported B2026-044 and C2026-035. After sending that information out, Paul responded that he already knew of B2026-044 and reported as B2026-043. I updated the Word document to reflect the testing requirements for B2026-042 because the document had been submitted as a duplicate of C2026-027.