CASE STUDY | SAP MIGRATION
How Did Aceteroid Cut Custom ABAP Conversion Effort by 85 to 90 Percent in a Production Relevant Quality Management Report Conversion?
Accelerated SAP ECC to SAP S/4HANA Conversion Using Aceteroid
Business-relevant custom ABAP report in a real migration context
As part of an ERPROOTS-led SAP modernization initiative, a senior ABAP developer used Aceteroid to
convert a production-relevant ECC custom report into S/4HANA-compliant code.
The program supported Quality Management and Warehouse teams in monitoring and analyzing
inspection lots across inbound and production quality processes.
Key Parameters
SAP ECC 6.0 EHP7
SAP S/4HANA 2021
Approximately 5,000 lines of custom ABAP
Aceteroid, including Code Migration and Chat Fix features
Project Context
This conversion was carried out on an actual business-relevant custom report used for operational
tasks in SAP Quality Management processes.
The objective was to accelerate technical adaptation work during SAP ECC to SAP S/4HANA conversion while keeping senior ABAP review, business logic validation, and performance checks firmly in place.
Aceteroid was used to reduce the repetitive remediation effort, while the developer remained responsible for technical review and final sign-off.
The Technical Challenge
A 5,000-line QM report that had evolved across multiple SAP release cycles had accumulated ECC-era patterns that were either unsupported or flagged as ATC blocking findings in S/4HANA.
Manual conversion would have required a developer to work through each issue systematically before
the code could even transport cleanly.
Major Anti-Patterns Found in the Program
- SELECT statements inside LOOP processing
- Header-line internal tables
- Deprecated QM-specific function modules
- Hard-coded status logic
- REUSE ALV framework usage
- A common performance risk and frequent ATC violation
- Deprecated since ABAP 7.40 and not aligned with modern S/4HANA syntax expectations
- Some have no direct modern equivalent
- Built around ECC-era object keys
- Functional in ECC, but no longer the preferred framework in modern ABAP
These issues collectively triggered multiple ATC blocking findings. Left unresolved, they would prevent
transport into the S/4HANA system.
For a 5,000-line report, resolving all of this manually would mean reading through the program,
identifying each deprecated construct, understanding the right replacement pattern, and rewriting the
logic section by section. That is typically a multi-day effort for a single developer.
How Aceteroid Was Applied
The senior ABAP developer used Aceteroid’s direct code migration workflow.
The ECC source was provided to the tool, the target declaration standards were selected to match project coding conventions, and the migration was executed.
Aceteroid analyzed the full program and produced an SAP S/4HANA-oriented output in approximately 20 to 30 minutes.
What Aceteroid Handled Automatically
- Open SQL modernization
- REUSE ALV to SALV replacement
- Deprecated QM function modules
- Header-line internal tables
- LOOP processing optimization
- Declaration standardization
- CDS view recommendations
- Restructured SELECT logic for S/4HANA-compatible syntax
- Handled the framework shift without manual rewriting
- Identified them and suggested replacements
- Converted them into typed table and field-symbol-based patterns
- Updated logic using modern ABAP syntax and more performance-aware patterns
- Aligned output to the selected coding convention profile
- Identified relevant CDS views for developer selection
Minor syntax issues that remained after conversion were resolved using Aceteroid Chat Fix, which accepts compiler errors or ATC findings and returns targeted corrective suggestions.
Aceteroid also supports an alternative workflow in which a Functional Specification document is provided as input. In that approach, the tool analyzes the FS, identifies relevant CDS views, and generates program logic aligned to the defined business requirement.
Output Quality and Developer Review
The conversion produced strong results, while still requiring developer judgment in specific areas
What Worked Well
- Open SQL conversion
- ALV to SALV replacement
- Deprecated QM function modules
- CDS view mapping
- Declaration and naming standardization
- Restructured correctly in the generated output
- Accurate and did not require manual rewrite
- Replacement recommendations were accurate and actionable
- Relevant views were correctly identified and presented for selection
- Output aligned to the defined code profile
Overall, approximately 80 to 85 percent of the generated code compiled and ran correctly without modification.
What Still Required Manual Review
- Business logic interpretation
- Naming standard alignment
- Performance validation
- Fine-tuning for edge cases and custom validations not fully explicit in the source logic or documentation
- Minor adjustments in a subset of generated identifiers
- Review of complex joins and higher-volume runtime scenarios before sign-off
The remaining 15 to 20 percent required targeted manual refinements, not rewrites.
Validation Approach
The generated output was not treated as final by default.
- Syntax correctness
- ATC-related issue remediation
- Architectural soundness
- Business logic alignment
- Performance-sensitive sections before sign-off
- Yes
- Yes
- Yes
- Yes
- Yes
This kept Aceteroid focused on accelerating repetitive remediation work, while final delivery ownership remained with the developer.
The Numbers
Manual Effort vs Aceteroid-Assisted Effort
- Identify deprecated APIs and syntax issues
- REUSE ALV to SALV refactoring
- Open SQL modernization
- CDS view selection and mapping
- ATC issue resolution
- Review, testing, and adjustments
-
Total
- 3 to 5 hours
- 2 to 4 hours
- 2 to 3 hours
- 1 to 2 hours
- 4 to 6 hours
- 3 to 4 hours
-
Approximately 16 to 24 hours, or 2 to 3 working days
- Automated
- Automated plus review
- Automated
- Tool-assisted, approximately 15 minutes
- Approximately 30 minutes postconversion
- Approximately 90 minutes
-
Approximately 2 to 2.5 hours
Practitioner Response
My role shifted from rewriting code to validating architecture and business logic. Around 80 to 85 percent of the code worked on the first run. What would have taken me 2 to 3 working days was done in about 2.5 hours, including review and corrections.
Senior ABAP Developer
SAP Modernization Delivery Team, ERPROOTS
Key Takeaway
Aceteroid worked best as a migration accelerator, not as a replacement for developer judgment.
In ECC to S/4HANA conversion work, much of the effort is spent on predictable and repetitive tasks
such as identifying deprecated syntax, replacing obsolete APIs, resolving ATC findings, and modernizing technical patterns. Aceteroid reduced that effort significantly.
What still required senior ABAP expertise was the reasoning layer: validating business intent, reviewing
performance implications, and making the final technical decisions needed before sign-off.
The result was a clear shift in effort, from manual rewriting toward guided review and validation.
Why This Matters for SAP Migration Programs
Most SAP ECC landscapes contain hundreds to thousands of custom ABAP objects. Every one of those objects must be analyzed, converted, cleared through ATC, and validated before go-live.
That effort compounds quickly, and custom code conversion often sits directly on the critical path of the migration.
This conversion pattern is especially relevant for custom ABAP objects that contain recurring ECC-era anti-patterns, where repetitive remediation can be accelerated while business-critical validation remains under developer control.
When a 5,000-line report with multiple ECC-era anti-patterns can move from a multi-day manual activity to an approximately 2.5-hour AI-assisted process, the implications for larger code portfolios become meaningful.
The value is not just speed. It is better predictability, reduced repetitive effort, and more developer time redirected toward validation and business-critical review.
Take Control of Custom ABAP in Your S/4HANA Migration
Aceteroid brings decision clarity, governed execution, and post-migration control to custom code.