Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixed currency selection on confirm step #34075

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Feb 5, 2024

Conversation

shubham1206agra
Copy link
Contributor

@shubham1206agra shubham1206agra commented Jan 6, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #33608
PROPOSAL: #33608 (comment)

Tests

  1. Open App
  2. Tap FAB button > Request money
  3. Select Manual tab
  4. Complete the flow till the confirmation step.
  5. Click on Amount field to edit
  6. Click on Currency and change to another one
  7. Again click on Currency and verify if new selected currency is shown
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as Tests

QA Steps

Same as Tests

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-01-22.at.6.58.11.PM.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2024-01-22.at.5.14.11.PM.mov
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-01-22.at.6.44.34.PM.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-01-22.at.5.10.29.PM.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-01-22.at.5.07.19.PM.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2024-01-22.at.6.37.29.PM.mov

@shubham1206agra
Copy link
Contributor Author

Screen.Recording.2024-01-06.at.9.37.59.PM.mov

@hoangzinh There's a slight delay in updating the currency. Is that fine as we are changing currency on unmount only?

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

@shubham1206agra
Copy link
Contributor Author

@shubham1206agra I recall there is related issue here https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1704368050838699

This will not be fixed by that. I am proposing to use a spinner while old value is present.

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

hoangzinh commented Jan 9, 2024

ah I just want to share that "There's a slight delay in updating the currency" might cause an issue later. I think using a spinner is work around and it will cause bad UX when user see a spinner in a short time

@shubham1206agra
Copy link
Contributor Author

ah I just want to share that "There's a slight delay in updating the currency" might cause an issue later. I think using a spinner is work around and it will cause bad UX when user see a spinner in a short time

Can you suggest me what should we do in this case?

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

@shubham1206agra sorry I was thinking about what should we do so I'm late. Wdyt about the approach here https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1704818739022579

Wait onyx updated then goBack 🤔

@shubham1206agra
Copy link
Contributor Author

@shubham1206agra sorry I was thinking about what should we do so I'm late. Wdyt about the approach here https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1704818739022579

Wait onyx updated then goBack 🤔

To be honest, this looks like a bad idea to just simply wait as it might look laggy to the user. I think its safe to use spinner (I know it will be a short spinner), rather than simply wait, which is actually an anti-pattern in the code.

What is your opinion on this @tgolen?

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

this looks like a bad idea to just simply wait as it might look laggy to the user

Agreed. I'm okay with Spinner. Just wanna confirm, is it a full loading screen?

@shubham1206agra
Copy link
Contributor Author

this looks like a bad idea to just simply wait as it might look laggy to the user

Agreed. I'm okay with Spinner. Just wanna confirm, is it a full loading screen?

Right now, I am thinking spinner on amount only. But I think, full screen spinner would be better.

@shubham1206agra shubham1206agra marked this pull request as ready for review January 22, 2024 13:29
@shubham1206agra shubham1206agra requested a review from a team as a code owner January 22, 2024 13:29
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from hoangzinh and removed request for a team January 22, 2024 13:29
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 22, 2024

@hoangzinh Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

@shubham1206agra thanks for updates, I will try to do code review within 2 days.

@@ -318,6 +328,8 @@ function IOURequestStepConfirmation({
IOU.setMoneyRequestBillable_temporaryForRefactor(transactionID, billable);
};

const isLoading = !!(transaction && transaction.originalCurrency);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we need to leave comment here to explain why we have this code

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@shubham1206agra could you help to leave a comment here, other than that it looks good to me.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks mate

IOU.setMoneyRequestCurrency_temporaryForRefactor(transactionID, originalCurrency.current, true);
};
// eslint-disable-next-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
}, []);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm thinking is it possible if we don't need an additional useRef and modify current IOU.setMoneyRequestOriginalCurrency_temporaryForRefactor to pass a 3rd params like current implementation.

How about?

useEffect(() => {
    IOU.setMoneyRequestOriginalCurrency_temporaryForRefactor(transactionID, currency);
    return () => {
        if (isSaveButtonPressed.current) {
            return;
        }
        IOU.setMoneyRequestCurrency_temporaryForRefactor(transactionID, transaction.originalCurrency);
    };
    // eslint-disable-next-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
}, []);

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually, it was creating some problems as it was keeping old values in mount / unmount.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Or we can always reset originalCurrency on unmount.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let keep it this way as it helps me with cases of refresh (it will call mount again, and will set wrong value on refresh).

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @shubham1206agra I will try to test & complete review checklist tomorrow

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

hoangzinh commented Feb 3, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-02-03.at.20.14.52.android.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2024-02-03.at.19.45.36.android.chrome.mov
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-02-03.at.19.50.10.ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-02-03.at.19.47.36.ios.safari.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-02-03.at.19.41.52.web.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2024-02-03.at.19.43.43.desktop.mov

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from techievivek February 3, 2024 13:17
Copy link
Contributor

@techievivek techievivek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, thanks.

@techievivek techievivek merged commit 8034a1b into Expensify:main Feb 5, 2024
16 of 18 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Feb 5, 2024

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Feb 5, 2024

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.36-5 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

@Expensify/applauseleads please QA this PR and check it off on the deploy checklist if it passes.

1 similar comment
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Feb 5, 2024

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/thienlnam in version: 1.4.36-5 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

@Expensify/applauseleads please QA this PR and check it off on the deploy checklist if it passes.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Feb 7, 2024

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.4.37-7 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

@sobitneupane
Copy link
Contributor

This regression is caused by changes introduced in this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants