fix: show disabled distance rate if it is selected in IOU request #47850

dominictb · 2024-08-22T10:30:49Z

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Precondition:
Workspace has some distance rates.
2. Go to NewDot app
3. Go to workspace chat.
4. Submit a distance expense with Distance rate A.
5. Go to workspace settings > Distance rates.
6. Disable Distance rate A used in Step 3.
7. Go back to transaction thread of the distance expense.
8. Click Rate.

Verify that: The disabled rate will appear selected in the Rate list but grayed out (like Category and Tag when selected and disabled afterward).

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Precondition:
Workspace has some distance rates.
2. Go to NewDot app
3. Go to workspace chat.
4. Submit a distance expense with Distance rate A.
5. Go to workspace settings > Distance rates.
6. Disable Distance rate A used in Step 3.
7. Go back to transaction thread of the distance expense.
8. Click Rate.

Verify that: The disabled rate will appear selected in the Rate list but grayed out (like Category and Tag when selected and disabled afterward).

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- 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 UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design 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: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2024-08-22T10:30:54Z

@mananjadhav 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]

mananjadhav · 2024-08-22T18:42:49Z

Will review this by tomorrow.

mananjadhav · 2024-08-26T08:15:48Z

src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepDistanceRate.tsx

@@ -65,6 +64,8 @@ function IOURequestStepDistanceRate({

    const currentRateID = TransactionUtils.getRateID(transaction) ?? '-1';

+    const rates = DistanceRequestUtils.getMileageRates(policy, false, currentRateID);


I don't see the change to remove the Onyx keys. Is it already removed in another PR/refactor?

Yes, it is removed in #46859

mananjadhav · 2024-08-28T17:04:23Z

Code change is okay. Will work on the checklist.

mananjadhav · 2024-08-29T19:01:39Z

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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- 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 UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

mananjadhav · 2024-08-29T19:20:07Z

I also tested a scenario where we have multiple disabled rates:

only if the current one is disabled it'll show greyed out.
if it's not the current one and disabled it would hide.

mananjadhav · 2024-09-02T15:25:56Z

quick bump @iwiznia

iwiznia · 2024-09-02T17:39:09Z

src/libs/DistanceRequestUtils.ts

@@ -45,7 +46,7 @@ function getMileageRates(policy: OnyxInputOrEntry<Policy>, includeDisabledRates
    }

    Object.entries(distanceUnit.rates).forEach(([rateID, rate]) => {
-        if (!includeDisabledRates && rate.enabled === false) {
+        if (!includeDisabledRates && rate.enabled === false && (!selectedRateID || rateID !== selectedRateID)) {


!selectedRateID would fail if we have a rateID that's "0" no?

If selectedRateID = "0" this condition !selectedRateID will be false (which is expected), no?

No, "0" would be the ID, which means it has an ID

No, "0" would be the ID, which means it has an ID

Sorry, I don't quite follow what you mean by '0' being the ID. Could you clarify that for me?

If I create a rate whose ID is the string "0" then select it, this would not work because !"0" is false but that's wrong because we indeed passed an ID, so we should've compared selectedRateID with rateID but we did not

so we should've compared selectedRateID with rateID but we did not

No. I think with the current condition:

if (!includeDisabledRates && rate.enabled === false && (!selectedRateID || rateID !== selectedRateID)) {

we still compare selectedRateID with rateID via rateID !== selectedRateID.

CMIIWW. Thanks

Oh, you are right! I was confusing the behavior with PHP where "0" is falsy

OSBotify · 2024-09-09T17:48:58Z

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

fix: show disabled distance rate if it is selected in IOU request

db61dbe

dominictb requested a review from a team as a code owner August 22, 2024 10:30

melvin-bot bot requested review from mananjadhav and removed request for a team August 22, 2024 10:30

mananjadhav reviewed Aug 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

mananjadhav approved these changes Aug 29, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from iwiznia August 29, 2024 19:17

iwiznia requested changes Sep 2, 2024

View reviewed changes

iwiznia approved these changes Sep 9, 2024

View reviewed changes

iwiznia merged commit d60de67 into Expensify:main Sep 9, 2024
23 of 25 checks passed

IuliiaHerets mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-09-18] Distance rate - Dollar sign moves to left after clicking/tapping it #48833

Closed

6 tasks

mananjadhav mentioned this pull request Sep 25, 2024

[$250][P2P Distance] - Disabled rate is not listed in the Rate list when it is still selected #46884

Closed

6 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix: show disabled distance rate if it is selected in IOU request #47850

fix: show disabled distance rate if it is selected in IOU request #47850

dominictb commented Aug 22, 2024

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 22, 2024

mananjadhav commented Aug 22, 2024

mananjadhav Aug 26, 2024

dominictb Aug 26, 2024

mananjadhav commented Aug 28, 2024

mananjadhav commented Aug 29, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mananjadhav commented Aug 29, 2024

mananjadhav commented Sep 2, 2024

iwiznia Sep 2, 2024

dominictb Sep 4, 2024

iwiznia Sep 4, 2024

dominictb Sep 5, 2024

iwiznia Sep 5, 2024

dominictb Sep 9, 2024

iwiznia Sep 9, 2024

OSBotify commented Sep 9, 2024

		@@ -65,6 +64,8 @@ function IOURequestStepDistanceRate({

		const currentRateID = TransactionUtils.getRateID(transaction) ?? '-1';

		const rates = DistanceRequestUtils.getMileageRates(policy, false, currentRateID);

fix: show disabled distance rate if it is selected in IOU request #47850

fix: show disabled distance rate if it is selected in IOU request #47850

Conversation

dominictb commented Aug 22, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 22, 2024

mananjadhav commented Aug 22, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mananjadhav commented Aug 28, 2024

mananjadhav commented Aug 29, 2024 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

mananjadhav commented Aug 29, 2024

mananjadhav commented Sep 2, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Sep 9, 2024

mananjadhav commented Aug 29, 2024 •

edited

Loading