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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Fix reintroduced dependencies from conflict resolution #41152

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 30, 2024
Merged

Fix reintroduced dependencies from conflict resolution #41152

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
160e277
Remove dependencies that were added by mistake during conflict resolu…
brunovjk Apr 27, 2024
9c70d9d
Document exclusion of 'transaction' dependency for one-time autoselec…
brunovjk Apr 28, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
5 changes: 4 additions & 1 deletion src/components/MoneyRequestConfirmationList.tsx
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -503,6 +503,7 @@ function MoneyRequestConfirmationList({
return;
}
IOU.setMoneyRequestCategory(transactionID, enabledCategories[0].name);
// Keep 'transaction' out to ensure that we autoselect the option only once
// eslint-disable-next-line react-hooks/exhaustive-deps
}, [shouldShowCategories, policyCategories, isCategoryRequired]);

Expand All @@ -520,7 +521,9 @@ function MoneyRequestConfirmationList({
if (updatedTagsString !== TransactionUtils.getTag(transaction) && updatedTagsString) {
IOU.setMoneyRequestTag(transactionID, updatedTagsString);
}
}, [policyTagLists, transaction, transactionID, policyTags, canUseViolations]);
// Keep 'transaction' out to ensure that we autoselect the option only once
// 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 think it'll be better to document the reason why needs to have disable comments here. Yeah, I know that the original PR also didn't add the reason. Just a short reason documented will make it easier to read and maintain the code.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@brunovjk brunovjk Apr 28, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great idea! Please take a look and tell me what you think.

}, [policyTagLists, policyTags, canUseViolations]);
Comment on lines +524 to +526
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should have kept the transactionID here because at the first render there is no transaction and on the second render this effect does not run which caused #52879. Also the transactionID does not change afterwards i.e. does not cause problems as the transaction.


/**
*/
Expand Down
Loading