A company uses Dynamics 365 Finance. You implement an extension of a method named calc in ClassA. The calc method: - Accepts an integer as an input parameter. - Returns an integer as an output…

Question

Exhibits

Options

• Apublic int calc(int _value) { if (_value > 10) { throw error('The value cannot be greater than 10.'); } int ret = next calc(_value); return ret; }
• Bpublic int calc(int _value) { if (_value > 10) { throw error('The value cannot be greater than 10.'); } }
• Cpublic int calc(int _value) { int ret = next calc(_value); if (_value > 10) { throw error('The value cannot be greater than 10.'); } return ret; }
• Dpublic int calc(int _value) { int ret; if (_value <= 10) { ret = next calc(_value); } return ret; }

• A
  63% (12)
• B
  21% (4)
• C
  11% (2)
• D
  5% (1)

Explanation

Option A correctly checks the input value before calling next calc(_value), which is the X++ keyword that invokes the original (standard) method. By throwing an error first when _value > 10, the standard code is never reached, satisfying the requirement - and for valid inputs, the result of the original method is captured and returned properly.

Option B never calls next calc() at all, meaning the standard code never runs for any input value, and it also lacks a return statement, which won't compile for a method that must return an integer. Option C calls next calc(_value) before the condition check, so the standard code already executes even when the value exceeds 10 - too late to prevent it. Option D silently returns the default integer value of 0 when the input is invalid rather than signaling an error, which is incorrect behavior and hides the problem from the caller.

Memory tip: In X++ extensions, think of next as the "go ahead" command to the standard code - your guard clause must come before next, not after, and omitting next entirely breaks the extension chain for all valid inputs.

No community discussion yet for this question.