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

Create ReportActionsList to organize and Isolate problem code in ReportActionsView #8830

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
May 2, 2022

Conversation

marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor

@marcaaron marcaaron commented Apr 29, 2022

Details

This is an effort to clean up the ReportActionsView and start getting things under control. For now, I've focused on isolating stuff that more or less makes sense and separating it out from things that are confusing e.g.

  • Setting the "last read action" for a report
  • The Message counter stuff added in the past year
  • componentDidUpdate() logic that handles a "new action that is not from the current user" event
  • The "new marker" logic
  • Basically anything related to unreads I'm leaving in the ReportActionsView

Changes that were made

  • Anything related to the list of actions has been moved into a ReportActionsList
  • The copy selection subscriber thing is now in it's own module so we can forget it exists
  • Some minor improvements to the logic in componentDidUpdate() to make the conditional logic there a little clearer

Note: No logic should be changed in this PR as it is just a reorganization of existing code.

Fixed Issues

$ #8829

Tests

Check for general regressions around the chat views, chat switching etc.

  1. Open a chat and verify there are no errors
  2. Verify things related to chat and chat messages appear to be normal with no major regressions
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Review Checklist

PR Reviewer Checklist

  • 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 verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • iOS / native
    • Android / native
    • iOS / Safari
    • Android / Chrome
    • MacOS / Chrome
    • 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 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by tagging the marketing team 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 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 */
    • Any functional components have the displayName property
    • 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 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(themeColors.componentBG)
  • 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.

QA Steps

Check for general regressions around the chat views, chat switching etc.

  1. Open a chat and verify there are no errors
  2. Verify things related to chat and chat messages appear to be normal with no major regressions
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Screenshots

@marcaaron marcaaron self-assigned this Apr 29, 2022
@marcaaron marcaaron marked this pull request as ready for review April 29, 2022 17:09
@marcaaron marcaaron requested a review from a team as a code owner April 29, 2022 17:09
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from techievivek and removed request for a team April 29, 2022 17:10
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.

Went through all the 3 changed files and tested this locally. Everything worked pretty well and this refactor was indeed a great move.

index,
}) {
const shouldDisplayNewIndicator = this.props.report.newMarkerSequenceNumber > 0
&& item.action.sequenceNumber === this.props.report.newMarkerSequenceNumber;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Making sure I understand this, it should be >= or ===?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you ask this question another way?

I believe the left side of the condition is checking to make sure we do not have 0 since that would show a new line indicator at the bottom of the chat and it's supposed to go above at least one chat message.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was asking this for this part of the condition item.action.sequenceNumber === this.props.report.newMarkerSequenceNumber. From my understanding, I thought for a current item to be considered new its sequence number must be greater than the newMarkerSequenceNumber or it should be equal?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm sorry, I still don't understand what it is you're asking. It sounds like you concluded that the current item's sequence number would need to be greater than the "new marker sequence number"? I'm not sure how you got that though. Let me know if you have a specific question and try to add as much context as possible if you can.

@marcaaron marcaaron merged commit 68f0bbf into main May 2, 2022
@marcaaron marcaaron deleted the marcaaron-reportActionsList2 branch May 2, 2022 17:31
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented May 2, 2022

✋ 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 May 9, 2022

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by @sketchydroide in version: 1.1.57-8 🚀

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

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by @chiragsalian in version: 1.1.57-17 🚀

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.

3 participants