workflows - branched IF conditions

[mrswann]

I previously had this working from the mini-lab https://community.servicenow.com/community/develop/blog/2015/10/18/mini-lab-workflows--playing-with-...  

On a different project now and I want to employ the same again...

I am struggling to get the Condition to pay attention to the results in the script??

The script as follows:

activity = ifScript();
function ifScript() {
       var result = {VALUE1:false,VALUE2:false, VALUE3:false, VALUE4:false};
       if (VariableFieldValue == 'true') {
                       result.VALUE1 = true;
       }
result.VALUE2 = true;
result.VALUE3 = 'true';
return result;
}

I have 4 conditions for the IF statement branches,

and so on...

I have also included some logs in the script and can see that the result.VALUEs are being updated, so it seems I am accessing the values incorrectly in the conditions to catch the output flows

when i had it without activity.result and just result.VALUE (no activity.) it was throwing an unbound or wrapped exception on result

[Chuck Tomasi]

You seem to be inconsistent in your boolean values.

Be careful how you are using true and 'true'. The first is a boolean and the second is a string. Either is valid as long as you are consistent. However if you set a variable   like this:

var myVar = 'true';

This does not evaluate to true

if (myVar == true)

or if you set it to

myVar = 'false';

then THIS actually resolves to TRUE!

if (myVar)

because it is just checking for a non-null string value.

[mrswann]

Indeed and I apologise for confusion.

The first check about the variable, I believe comes in as a string. It is a checkbox display value?

The other inconsistencies are because I was trialling and erroring as part of a debug. Prior to that I was utilising pure boolean as activity.result.VALUEs , so if we assume all are set as boolean, and the condition is checking as boolean - what else could I be doing wrong?

[Kalaiarasan Pus]

Why not use a switch instead of 'If' block?

[mrswann]

I need to be able to fire these simultaneously they are not mutually exclusive