ENTRY POINTUnder review

F290FORNP

User Function F290FORNP()

Controls destination supplier and store editing on the first FINA290 screen.

F290FORNPFINA290

01 · OVERVIEW

Overview

The historical TDN page describes locking the destination supplier and store fields. .F. prevents editing; .T. allows it. The standard context exposes mutable private variables cFornP and cLojaP. (TOTVS, ref. 1) The P12.2210 listing places the call in both field WHEN conditions in FA290AUT, without a fourth argument. MV_PAR01 == 2 is another condition: returning .T. does not remove that outer restriction. (Ref. 2)

02 · SYNTAX

Syntax

User Function F290FORNP()

Parameters

cFornP

Private / CharacterExecution context

Destination supplier, mutable private variable. (Ref. 1)

cLojaP

Private / CharacterExecution context

Destination store, mutable private variable. (Ref. 1)

Return value

Logical: .F. locks the fields; .T. allows editing when the other screen conditions are satisfied. (Ref. 1)

03 · PRACTICAL EXAMPLE

Lock editing without replacing the supplier

#Include "Protheus.ch"

User Function F290FORNP()
    // Adapted from the purpose and return documented by TOTVS (ref. 1).
    // Called from field WHEN conditions; do not write records here.
    // Keeps the current cFornP and cLojaP values.
Return .F.

Expected result

Proposes retaining current values and locking both fields. Does not define a supplier, store or invoicing rule. Example not compiled or run in Protheus.

BEST PRACTICES

Declaring Local cFornP or Local cLojaP creates local variables instead of updating the caller private variables.
The official example assigns private values and returns .F.; fixed supplier and store values require master data validation and a business rule. The editorial example only locks editing.
The interface may evaluate WHEN repeatedly. Avoid repeated messages, record writes or integrations with side effects.
The historical page lists Protheus 10/11 and Brazil. This does not establish automatic compatibility with every current release.
Editorial test plan: compare standard and customized behavior in the described operations, inspect resulting records and record release and patch.
Under review: sources and example checked against documentation; code not compiled or run in Protheus. Exact transaction position and target release behavior remain unconfirmed.