Automate sales order payments through x++ code

 



We all are aware of  'Complete' sales order functionality: which essentially completes a sales order by making differential payments, added to line.

It submits the command by sending out a nudge to payment lines (CustPaymTable [if any]), by checking out the changes/added/removed from sales inventory/work added and then either closes the transaction by either authorizing the transaction or by failing it by declining the same:





Suppose, you have a situation, where you need to automate this, by reading from some staging table, and then doing the needful to complete the payment.
The following code explains the process:
 MCROrderRecapStatus recapStatus =   MCREndOrder::orderRecap(_salesTable,
                                                                        mcrSalesOrderTotals);
Here you are calling the above shown form, (through code, we don't need to show it). Evidently, _salesTable is the sales table buffer with differential changes.
And then getting the status of the payment, from below:
MCRCustPaymTotals   custPaymTotals = MCRCustPaymTotals::construct(_salesTable.TableId,
                                                    _salesTable.RecId,
                                                    mcrSalesOrderTotals);

Now, you need to analyze the result:
if (recapStatus == MCROrderRecapStatus::Close)
            {
                   //The payment was successful
            }
            else if (recapStatus == MCROrderRecapStatus::CloseAuth)
            {
                   //The payment was authorized
            }
            else if (recapStatus == MCROrderRecapStatus::OpenError)
            {
                boolean  isOutOfBalance = !custPaymTotals.validateTotalPaymAmount(false);
                if (isOutOfBalance
                || custPaymTotals.getOverallPaymStatus() == MCRCustPaymStatus::Declined)
                {
                     //The payment has either been declined or  an out-of-balance situation has resulted
                }
            }

That's it guys😛😛😛

This essentially gives you the status of the transaction, which you can subsequently throw back to your staging table, for furtherances. 
Winding up for now, wishing you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year 2024.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Make your menu items visible on main menu, conditionally,, using this cool feature of D365FO

Image
  Wassup guys? I am sure you must have encountered this situation where you needed to display your menuItems, on main menu, based on some condition, haven't you? This was only possible by using config keys and flights. Things get a bit tricky,  when suppose you have a requirement like this: you need to make it dynamic, by introducing a toggle switch on a field on a paremeter form.  Suppose on Accounts Receivables Parameters >> You have a field called ' Show US customer '. You have a requirement that says when you turn on this toggle, then only the menuItem ' Input SSN details ', under AR module. This is now highly acheivable by leveraging subscription to 'SysMenuNavigationObjectFactory' class, simply by saying a. Create a new class USMenuItemsVisibilityManager b. Copy the following method, with proper documentation (don't change signature/anything else) [SubscribesTo(classstr(SysMenuNavigationObjectFactory), staticdelegatestr(SysMenuNavigationObjec...
Read more

X++ : mistakes which developers commit the most

Image
   The most important thing is to remember where and when to write the code. a. Developers have an inherent habit of writing erratic select statements: select * from custTable where custTable.AccountNum == <SomeValue> Where in essence we need to make use of optimized choice of fields in the select statement. b. Making use of 'continue' keywords: While select custTrans where <someConditions> { if (cusTTrans.CustGroup != mappingTable.CustGroup) { continue; } } 'Continue' statements are precisely a very unhygienic way of designing your code. The above statement could have been easily ornamented by using exists/not exists joins. Using Continue statements would eventually result in a high performance impact. Also select statements should be made punctuated with a 'firstonly' clause -- just not from best practise standpoint, but also from performance considerations. c. Writing nested loops: This is a common mistake that perha...
Read more

Are you still using macros? Be sure you read this.

Image
  You still use a lot of macros in your code, don't you? Of course you should: Macros, as per Microsoft,  are p recompiler directives are processed before the code is compiled. The directives declare and handle macros and their values. The directives are removed by the precompiler so that the X++ compiler never encounters them. The X++ compiler only sees the sequence of characters written into the X++ code by the directives. However macros, are not quite recomended by Microsoft. They are slow, they can be subsequently deorectaed at any later time.  The Macros are  actually  a type of classes, only that they are not instantiated and not need be defined as classes. Hence runtime garbage collection could be a huge issue, consquently (a class when gets out of scope, gets garbage-collected owing to the destructor classes of DOT net instrumentation classes). Summing up, macrros are a bit old way of writing code. Use static classes instead. public static class MyIdenti...
Read more