[NO QA][TS migration] Migrate '[Remaining]' test to TypeScript #36867

HezekielT · 2024-02-20T11:16:10Z

Details

Migrates
tests/unit/ViolationUtilsTest.js
tests/unit/UserUtilsTest.js
tests/unit/PhoneNumberTest.js
tests/perf-test/SearchPage.perf-test.js
tests/perf-test/OptionsSelector.perf-test.js
tests/actions/PolicyTest.js

to Typescript.

Fixed Issues

$ #36135
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

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 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: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

tests/perf-test/OptionsSelector.perf-test.tsx

tests/perf-test/SearchPage.perf-test.tsx

melvin-bot · 2024-02-20T20:34:54Z

@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]

HezekielT · 2024-02-20T20:37:17Z

@mananjadhav PR is ready but I'm having some typescript issues that I couldn't address by myself and I need your help. Could you please check them when you get the chance. Thanks.

mananjadhav · 2024-03-04T17:58:50Z

@HezekielT Can you please merge with the latest main? I just reviewed your questions, but I've asked for help here from agency members who've setup TS in react-native-onyx.

mananjadhav · 2024-03-05T09:24:39Z

Thanks @ishpaul777. @HezekielT I hope we have queries answered. Can you please push the further changes?

cead22 · 2024-03-08T18:55:19Z

tests/actions/PolicyTest.ts

@@ -20,25 +21,27 @@ describe('actions/Policy', () => {
    });

    beforeEach(() => {
+        // @ts-expect-error TODO: Remove this once TestHelper (https://github.com/Expensify/App/issues/25318) is migrated to TypeScript.


Don't put TODOs in the code. If we have an issue, that's already good enough

I included the TODO part because of the guidelines

Suppress a TypeScript error stemming from the bug with @ts-expect-error. Create a separate GH issue. Prefix the issue title with [TS ERROR #]. Cross-link the migration PR and the created GH issue. On the same line as @ts-expect-error, put down the GH issue number prefixed with TODO:.
The @ts-expect-error annotation tells the TS compiler to ignore any errors in the line that follows it. However, if there's no error in the line, TypeScript will also raise an error.

Link

@hayata-suenaga any reason we need TODOs in the code, or are GH issues sufficient? I ask cause we normally don't put TODOs in code (see SO), and this guideline is kinda contradicts that. In any case, @HezekielT don't block on this, and sorry for the confusion

@cead22 We were at a point where every issue was blocked by some other and without @ts-expect-error we would be stuck or move very slowly. That's why we decided to allow TODOs in the codebase, the good part is that once TestHelper gets migrated here, this line will throw an error so these TODOs will disappear over time (once we migrate blocking files).

thanks @blazejkustra for the explanation!

Thanks for the context. I'm still curious, why do we need TODOs when we have GH issues? Don't the GH issues serve as TODOs? Could we link the lines of codes in the issues, instead of linking the issues in the code?

cead22 · 2024-03-08T18:56:21Z

tests/actions/PolicyTest.ts

-import * as Policy from '../../src/libs/actions/Policy';
-import ONYXKEYS from '../../src/ONYXKEYS';
+import OnyxUpdateManager from '@src/libs/actions/OnyxUpdateManager';
+import * as POLICY from '@src/libs/actions/Policy';


Suggested change

import * as POLICY from '@src/libs/actions/Policy';

import * as Policy from '@src/libs/actions/Policy';

HezekielT · 2024-03-09T08:56:29Z

@mananjadhav PR is ready for your review.

mananjadhav · 2024-03-10T18:51:14Z

Thanks for the updates. I'll review this today.

mananjadhav · 2024-03-12T05:38:10Z

I couldn't complete this yesterday. I am in the middle of the review, hoping to close this today.

mananjadhav · 2024-03-13T03:58:35Z

tests/perf-test/OptionsSelector.perf-test.tsx

@@ -51,7 +57,7 @@ const mutlipleSectionsConfig = [
    {numItems: 1000, indexOffset: 0},
    {numItems: 100, indexOffset: 70},
 ];
-
+// @ts-expect-error TODO: Remove this once OptionsSelector is migrated to TypeScript.


do we have any issue to track this @cead22 ? If not, should we be creating one?

We have this one but it's closed #25125. Maybe we need a new one for src/components/OptionsSelector/index.android.js and src/components/OptionsSelector/index.js

mananjadhav

One minor comment on tracking the issue, rest looks good.

mananjadhav · 2024-03-13T04:05:19Z

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

NA

Android: mWeb Chrome

NA

iOS: Native

NA

iOS: mWeb Safari

NA

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

NA

MacOS: Desktop

NA

tests/actions/PolicyTest.ts

tests/perf-test/SearchPage.perf-test.tsx

tests/unit/ViolationUtilsTest.ts

Co-authored-by: Carlos Alvarez <[email protected]>

cead22

One last request for changes. @mananjadhav can you re-review please?

tests/actions/PolicyTest.ts

Co-authored-by: Carlos Alvarez <[email protected]>

mananjadhav · 2024-03-17T16:41:41Z

Will review this later today.

OSBotify · 2024-03-18T18:50:06Z

✋ 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 · 2024-03-19T23:50:31Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cead22 in version: 1.4.55-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-03-20T00:51:06Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/cead22 in version: 1.4.55-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-03-22T16:09:52Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/AndrewGable in version: 1.4.55-3 🚀

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

HezekielT commented Feb 20, 2024

View reviewed changes

tests/perf-test/OptionsSelector.perf-test.tsx Show resolved Hide resolved

HezekielT commented Feb 20, 2024

View reviewed changes

tests/perf-test/SearchPage.perf-test.tsx Show resolved Hide resolved

HezekielT marked this pull request as ready for review February 20, 2024 20:34

HezekielT requested a review from a team as a code owner February 20, 2024 20:34

melvin-bot bot requested review from mananjadhav and removed request for a team February 20, 2024 20:34

HezekielT force-pushed the migrate/36135 branch from 035b6cb to e7a9069 Compare March 4, 2024 20:05

cead22 requested changes Mar 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

HezekielT added 18 commits March 9, 2024 11:29

wip migrate ViolationUtilsTest to ts

33b1400

finished migrating ViolationUtilsTest to ts

dbe4d7c

migrate UserUtilsTest to ts

9d10ab7

migrate PhoneNumberTest to ts

0bfbaee

wip migrate SearchPage.perf-test to ts

cb7e261

created type SearchPageProps

8d354d1

created type for createAddListenerMock()

4d4628c

wip migrate OptionsSelector.perf-test to ts

6ff1321

used Awaited utility type to fix Promise related issue

6cae028

code cleanup

7b5f839

migrate PolicyTest to ts

46506f0

used Array.prototype.map correctly

2d930dc

removed unnecessary changes

59071f1

run prettier

3cc250c

run prettier

b0a88ed

added return type for jest mock function

dff82ff

added ts-expect-error

54deb99

added ts-expect-error

093e674

run prettier

f5e2c6a

mananjadhav reviewed Mar 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

mananjadhav approved these changes Mar 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from cead22 March 13, 2024 04:04

cead22 requested changes Mar 14, 2024

View reviewed changes

cead22 mentioned this pull request Mar 14, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-04-15] [Violations] [$500] Multilevel tags - "no longer valid" violation is shown after selecting all the tags #38044

Closed

6 tasks

HezekielT and others added 4 commits March 15, 2024 13:15

Update tests/perf-test/SearchPage.perf-test.tsx

8deff43

Co-authored-by: Carlos Alvarez <[email protected]>

code changes based on review

b914a43

Merge branch 'main' into migrate/36135

ac4284e

fix ts error

d2c5348

HezekielT requested a review from cead22 March 15, 2024 12:26

updated SearchPage props

599adad

cead22 requested changes Mar 15, 2024

View reviewed changes

tests/actions/PolicyTest.ts Show resolved Hide resolved

tests/actions/PolicyTest.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

remove unwanted check

aaad266

Co-authored-by: Carlos Alvarez <[email protected]>

HezekielT requested a review from mananjadhav March 15, 2024 16:34

mananjadhav approved these changes Mar 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from cead22 March 18, 2024 15:22

cead22 approved these changes Mar 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

cead22 merged commit 4f2ec61 into Expensify:main Mar 18, 2024
16 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Mar 19, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-03-19 #38651

Closed

66 tasks

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Mar 22, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-03-29] [$250] [TS migration] Migrate '[Remaining]' test to TypeScript #36135

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[NO QA][TS migration] Migrate '[Remaining]' test to TypeScript #36867

[NO QA][TS migration] Migrate '[Remaining]' test to TypeScript #36867

HezekielT commented Feb 20, 2024

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 20, 2024

HezekielT commented Feb 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mananjadhav commented Mar 4, 2024

mananjadhav commented Mar 5, 2024 •

edited

Loading

cead22 Mar 8, 2024

HezekielT Mar 9, 2024

cead22 Mar 11, 2024

blazejkustra Mar 12, 2024 •

edited

Loading

hayata-suenaga Mar 12, 2024

cead22 Mar 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

cead22 Mar 8, 2024

HezekielT commented Mar 9, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mananjadhav commented Mar 10, 2024

mananjadhav commented Mar 12, 2024

mananjadhav Mar 13, 2024

cead22 Mar 14, 2024

mananjadhav left a comment

mananjadhav commented Mar 13, 2024

cead22 left a comment

mananjadhav commented Mar 17, 2024

OSBotify commented Mar 18, 2024

OSBotify commented Mar 19, 2024

OSBotify commented Mar 20, 2024

OSBotify commented Mar 22, 2024

	import * as POLICY from '@src/libs/actions/Policy';
	import * as Policy from '@src/libs/actions/Policy';

[NO QA][TS migration] Migrate '[Remaining]' test to TypeScript #36867

[NO QA][TS migration] Migrate '[Remaining]' test to TypeScript #36867

Conversation

HezekielT commented Feb 20, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 20, 2024

HezekielT commented Feb 20, 2024 • edited Loading

mananjadhav commented Mar 4, 2024

mananjadhav commented Mar 5, 2024 • edited Loading

cead22 Mar 8, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

HezekielT Mar 9, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cead22 Mar 11, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

blazejkustra Mar 12, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hayata-suenaga Mar 12, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cead22 Mar 13, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cead22 Mar 8, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

HezekielT commented Mar 9, 2024 • edited Loading

mananjadhav commented Mar 10, 2024

mananjadhav commented Mar 12, 2024

mananjadhav Mar 13, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cead22 Mar 14, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mananjadhav left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mananjadhav commented Mar 13, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

cead22 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mananjadhav commented Mar 17, 2024

OSBotify commented Mar 18, 2024

OSBotify commented Mar 19, 2024

OSBotify commented Mar 20, 2024

OSBotify commented Mar 22, 2024

HezekielT commented Feb 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mananjadhav commented Mar 5, 2024 •

edited

Loading

blazejkustra Mar 12, 2024 •

edited

Loading

cead22 Mar 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

HezekielT commented Mar 9, 2024 •

edited

Loading