christianedensorarbon Red Ribbon

Have you tried a similar solution to this one: var currentRecord = context.currentRecord var lineNum = context.line currentRecord.selectLine({ sublistId : <your sublist value>, line : lineNum }); currentRecord.setCurrentSublistValue({ sublistId : <your sublist value>, fieldId : <your field>, value :…

Checking on accounts in 2016.1 and account in 2016.2, form level scripts with @NApiVersion either 2.x and 2.0 should be loaded properly on the form and work are expected. Could you attach the error stack for this one?

You may refer to the guide for Module Dependency Path https://netsuite.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/45053/ and require.config() https://netsuite.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/50900/ to help you in configuring your import

Hi David, I agree with Eric with the fact that you have declare the client script binding outside the creation of the list since the mentioned parameter is not on the list of parameters for the mentioned function. Also, it would be a better idea to use the clientScriptModulePath instead of the clientScriptFileId. Also I…

Good thing you are able to isolate it. Yup, more or less the code above actually looks good unless the variable lines[i] isn't the line index that you shouldn't be referring for the selection of lines which definitely caused problem on the iteration.

Hi Steve, I agree with you not being able to step into using the script debugger. The main reason for this is that require() and its content is treated as one line of command. Think of it this way, require() is just one command or function call which just checks if dependencies are present and performs a callback function…

I agree with the use of momentjs when it comes to dealing with Date and Time Management. But when it comes to dealing with TimeZone related concerns, format module has the capability of dealing with the timezone disparities.

From what I see from the documentation of Box, it requires a file type object to be posted instead. Take note that in SuiteScript 2.0, the value of the file is in base64 unlike the approach of doing in into other platforms like Java which actually post it as a File object.

For most experienced developers in the SuiteCloud ecosystem, I think they would prefer working on SuiteScript 1.0 since the APIs are already well packaged. Using SuiteScript 2.0 for big implementation would be only advantageous if the API that you need is in SuiteScript 2.0. It may still depend on the API need that your…

Actually, subsidiary sublist to be exposed for suitescript is still an enhancement 353856

FOllowing up on this, I would rather suggest the use of relative path. In a way it is a lot better when developing solutions as you can contain your custom modules on your project.

Hi @ironsode. The request timeout limit should still be 45 seconds similar to 1.0 since both would return the same format of error as well.

Hi @mhson1978, Saw that one there. Cool hack. Due to the fact the dialog module returns Promise object, it is not perfect for validation type events like validateField and saveRecord due to the fact the the Promise object waits for the response from the user whilst being async from the main page actions like submitting of…

I agree with jmaipid's note above. With the 2016.2 release, clientScriptModulePath attribute of the Form object can be used. Please note the path to be used in this clientScriptModulePath should comply with the specifications of Module Dependency path in SutieAnswers

I agree with Robbie, you can use the debugger object on you Chrome debugger as well as on Firefox (as long as Firebug is enabled on your Firefox). In Version 2016.2, you can play with the current record with the currentRecord module require(['N/currentRecord'], function(currentRecord){ var a = currentRecord.get(); var id =…

Another awesome NetSuite blog is made by borncorp (It contains NetSuite stuff)- https://ursuscode.com/

Hi mattdahse For this one, would you be able to file a support case for this one so we would be able to test it on our environment and try to replicate the scenario that you have and verify the behaviour.

g_dl Sounds like a great enhancement for our end. Kindly file a support ticket for this one so could could create an enhancement request for the mentioned functionality.

smurphy820 , I would suggest filing a support case as well so we could properly track these scenarios that you are experiencing on your end.

If you are using the SC IDE, there is a function to check the difference with the version of the customization in the account.

If you are using VS Code, VS has an option that could help you integrate the cmd which would eventually help you integrate the SDF CLI as mentioned by kcng

bmesa , I tried your scenario and I was able to replicate it and using kcng suggestion it worked on my end. More or less the action item that you just need is to write the values from listfiles to somewhere *like the use of tee* then just perform iterations from there.

I tried michoel 's sample in https://usergroup.netsuite.com/users/forum/platform-areas/customization/suitecloud-ide/423841-scripting-the-sdf-cli and it works great

mattdahse Are you using SuiteCloud IDE for this one or are you using the CLI? Mine's working on the IDE

Additionally, if you need to get the list of files given a specific folder on your account, you must use the -folder parameter with the path

More or less, the concern is pretty much related to the the project component management. For the XMLs for the script, it is important to have the reference on the XML object itself.

Hi @rspare, When you synced the custom object using the IDE, how did the deployment record look like? Can you provide the screenshot so we could verify it? Have you also tried creating a scheduled script deployment on UI then download the XML of the script. On my end, <scriptdeployments> <scriptdeployment…

HI michoel, As of the moment, Transaction forms is not in the list of supported custom objects in SDF based on SuiteAnswers 51672 https://netsuite.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/51672/

Yup. Tag inclusion is a good workaround for this kind of concern. Plus the good thing is about the support for files in SDF

mattdahse Make sure to file a support case to that Support could file an enhancement for the concern so we can have it addressed as well in the future.