CurrentRecord object method · N/currentRecord
setCurrentSublistValue()
CurrentRecord.setCurrentSublistValue(options)
Sets the value of the field in the currently selected line.
- Implementation
- Not started
- Design
- Open for proposals suggest how it should read
A
suitescript api
1objCurrentRecord.setCurrentSublistValue({2 sublistId: /* string, required */,3 fieldId: /* string, required */,4 value: /* number | Date | string | array | boolean, required */5});
| Parameter | Type | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| options.sublistId | string | required | The internal ID of the sublist. This value is displayed in the Records Browser. For more information, see Working with the SuiteScript Records Browser . |
| options.fieldId | string | required | The internal ID of a standard or custom sublist field. See Finding Internal IDs of Record Fields . |
| options.value | number | Date | string | array | boolean | required | The value to set the field to. The value type must correspond to the field type being set. For example: Text, Radio and Select fields accept string values. Checkbox fields accept boolean values. Date and DateTime fields accept Date values. Integer, Float, Currency and Percent fields accept number values. |
B
mynt syntax
No Mynt syntax yet.
Nothing in the language compiles to CurrentRecord.setCurrentSublistValue(options) today. How should it read?
C
community proposals
Competing syntax for setCurrentSublistValue, from GitHub Discussions. Select two or more to compare them side by side.
Loading proposals from GitHub…
D
suggest an alternative
Write the Mynt you wish you could write.
A good proposal shows the syntax, the SuiteScript it should become, and argues for it: why it is clearer, how it fits the rest of the language, what it makes harder.
- Clarity. Does it say what happens, without ceremony?
- Consistency. Does it read like
load,saveandRef[field]? - Expressiveness. Does it cover the cases people actually write?
- Honesty. Does it hide a NetSuite cost, such as governance, that a reader should see?