Bug 638464: Remove Subc. Detailed Calculation report; extend BaseApp report via event

[ChethanT]

Summary

• Report 99001500 "Subc. Detailed Calculation" was a full copy of BaseApp Report 99000756 "Detailed Calculation" with a no-op report substitution subscriber
• This caused duplicate Tell Me entries, lacked extensibility events, and the substitution never actually fired

Root Cause

\SubcReportingTriggersExt\ subscribed to \SubstituteReport\ but checked \if ReportId = Report::"Subc. Detailed Calculation"\ and set \NewReportId\ to itself (99001500 → 99001500). This was a no-op — it should have been substituting the BaseApp report (99000756).

Fix

1. BaseApp (separate NAV commit): Added integration event \OnAfterGetRecordRoutingLineOnBeforeCalcRoutingCostPerUnit\ to Report 99000756's Routing Line \OnAfterGetRecord\ trigger
2. Subcontracting app (this PR):
   • Removed Report 99001500 and its RDLC layout
   • Rewrote \SubcReportingTriggersExt\ to subscribe to the new BaseApp event and apply subcontractor pricing via \SubcPriceManagement.SetRoutingPriceListCost\
   • Removed the report from the permission set

Test

Added \DetailedCalculationReportUsesSubcontractorPricing\ in codeunit 139982 "Subc. Pricing Test" — [SCENARIO 638464].

Fixes AB#638464

🤖 Generated with GitHub Copilot

[github-actions]

$\textbf{🟠\ High\ Severity\ —\ Security} \quad \color{gray}{\texttt{\small Iteration\ 1}}$

Base report not added to permission set

The custom Subc. Detailed Calculation report (99001500) was removed from the permission set without adding the base Detailed Calculation report (99000756) in its place. Users assigned only the Subcontracting permission set will be unable to run the Detailed Calculation report after this change.

Recommendation:

• Add report "Detailed Calculation" = X to the permission set so subcontracting users retain access to the replaced report.

Suggested change

	report "Subc. Detailed Calculation" = X,
	report "Subc. Create SubCReturnOrder" = X,
	report "Detailed Calculation" = X,
	report "Subc. Dispatching List" = X;

_{👍 useful · ❤️ especially valuable · 👎 wrong - reply with why}

[github-actions]

$\textbf{🟡\ Medium\ Severity\ —\ Security} \quad \color{gray}{\texttt{\small Iteration\ 1}}$

IsHandled guard missing in event subscriber

The event subscriber does not check whether IsHandled is already true before executing. If another extension has already handled the event, this code will still run and override the earlier handler's result, silently suppressing its work.

Recommendation:

• Add an early exit at the start of the procedure when IsHandled is already true.

Suggested change

	IsHandled := true;
	begin
	if IsHandled then
	exit;
	if RoutingLine.Type <> RoutingLine.Type::"Work Center" then
	exit;

_{👍 useful · ❤️ especially valuable · 👎 wrong - reply with why}

[github-actions]

$\textbf{🟡\ Medium\ Severity\ —\ Style} \quad \color{gray}{\texttt{\small Iteration\ 1}}$

Test missing negative/fallback coverage

The new test only verifies the happy path where a subcontractor price exists and is picked up. There is no test case verifying that when a work center has a Subcontractor No. but no matching subcontractor price record exists, the report correctly falls back to the work center's own direct unit cost rather than outputting zero or an uninitialized value.

Recommendation:

• Add a second test procedure that creates a work center with a subcontractor but no SubcontractorPrice record, and asserts that ProdUnitCost equals the work center's Direct Unit Cost.

Suggested change

	DetailedCalculation.SetTableView(Item);
	[Test]
	procedure DetailedCalculationReportFallsBackToWorkCenterCostWhenNoPriceExists()
	// ... arrange: work center with Subcontractor No., no SubcontractorPrice record
	// ... assert: ProdUnitCost = WorkCenterDirectCost
	begin
	end;

_{👍 useful · ❤️ especially valuable · 👎 wrong - reply with why}