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

Simplify native attachment gallery paging context and improve code #34080

Merged

Conversation

chrispader
Copy link
Contributor

@chrispader chrispader commented Jan 7, 2024

maybe @tgolen, @pecanoro

Details

Based on #33756. Check this for actual diff.

This PR removes unnecessary prop-drilling and improves how we use the AttachmentCarouselPagerContext.

It also improves many of the components used in the (native) attachment gallery and simplifies some rendering logic.

The MultiGestureCanvas component is becoming more generic and can therefore be used in other cases more easily. The Lightbox component takes control of the adapted behaviour while in an attachment carousel.

Fixed Issues

$ #36034
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console
  1. Go to a report with attachments
  2. Open an (image) attachment
  3. Check that the attachment carousel is working
  4. Check that image gestures/transformations are working (pinching, panning, double tap, swiping)

Offline tests

None needed.

QA Steps

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Same as in 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
android.webm
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.-.2024-01-08.at.09.54.30.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop

@chrispader chrispader marked this pull request as ready for review January 8, 2024 08:44
@chrispader chrispader requested a review from a team as a code owner January 8, 2024 08:44
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from francoisl and removed request for a team January 8, 2024 08:44
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 8, 2024

@francoisl 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]

@chrispader chrispader changed the title [WIP] Simplify native attachment gallery paging context and improve code Simplify native attachment gallery paging context and improve code Jan 8, 2024
@chrispader chrispader changed the title Simplify native attachment gallery paging context and improve code [HOLD on #33756] Simplify native attachment gallery paging context and improve code Jan 8, 2024
chrispader added a commit to margelo/expensify-app-fork that referenced this pull request Jan 16, 2024
@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor

@pecanoro @tgolen I think I addressed all the comments - may I ask you to review again?

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor

@rushatgabhane Do you have time to review this one and complete the checklist? If not, we can find another volunteer

pecanoro
pecanoro previously approved these changes Feb 13, 2024
@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor

I don't have any ideas why TypeScript Checks is failing 🤔 (seems like it's not related to changes that were made).

@aimane-chnaif
Copy link
Contributor

I don't have any ideas why TypeScript Checks is failing 🤔 (seems like it's not related to changes that were made).

This is fixed now. It will be gone after pulling main

Comment on lines 28 to 30
/**
* The attachments to be rendered in the pager.
*/
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There is a mix of comment styles in this PR. The most consistent pattern across the codebase to use is to keep it all on a single like like /** blah blah */. Can you please go through this PR and make sure all the prop comments match this style?

Comment on lines +48 to +51
/**
* A callback that can be used to toggle the attachment carousel arrows, when the scale of the image changes.
* @param showArrows If set, it will show/hide the arrows. If not set, it will toggle the arrows.
*/
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

FYI this is fine as a multi-line comment since it has a param description.

Comment on lines 78 to 80
/**
* The pager uses the source index and current active state to render the pages.
*/
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
/**
* The pager uses the source index and current active state to render the pages.
*/

This isn't a valuable comment IMO. The code is clear enough.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

As a general rule of thumb, code comments should explain why the logic is what it is, and comments that only explain what the code is doing are low-value.

@@ -121,26 +147,38 @@ function AttachmentCarouselPager({items, renderItem, initialIndex, onPageSelecte
[],
);

const Content = useMemo(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Rename this to something more descriptive (and lower case the variable name). Suggestion: carouselItems.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why is useMemo() being used here? Is there a problem with rendering the content inline down below like it was before?

/>
</View>
)),
[activePageIndex, activeSource, items, styles.flex1],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

NAB: styles.flex1 will never change so it doesn't make sense to be used with useMemo()

Comment on lines +123 to +124
// eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/naming-convention
.onTouchesDown((_evt, state) => {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Bump on this convo.

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor

@tgolen I addressed all issues, would you mind to review it again?

@tgolen tgolen merged commit 8277ba5 into Expensify:main Feb 14, 2024
14 of 15 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

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

@tgolen
Copy link
Contributor

tgolen commented Feb 14, 2024

Oops, I made a mistake and merged this too early without the checklist being done and without all the platform videos added for testing. I will need to revert this, and then @kirillzyusko can you create a re-revert PR so that we can get it reviewed properly?

Sorry about that, folks.

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor

Oops, I made a mistake and merged this too early without the checklist being done and without all the platform videos added for testing. I will need to revert this, and then @kirillzyusko can you create a re-revert PR so that we can get it reviewed properly?

Sorry about that, folks.

Yes, sure, let's merge a reverted PR and then I'll create a new PR.

@pecanoro
Copy link
Contributor

Revert has been merged!

@pecanoro pecanoro removed the request for review from rushatgabhane February 14, 2024 16:33
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/tgolen in version: 1.4.42-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/chiragsalian in version: 1.4.42-5 🚀

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

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.

8 participants