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

clean: moved Category OptionListUtils over to CategoryOptionListUtils #52250

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Nov 22, 2024

Conversation

hannojg
Copy link
Contributor

@hannojg hannojg commented Nov 8, 2024

Explanation of Change

While working on performance fixes for the search over at this PR I touched the OptionListUtils a lot, specifically the getOptions and filterOptions functions.

It occurs to me that the getOptions function became a god-function that serves a lot of different use-cases, has a lot of responsibilities and is quite coupled with a lot of other places in the code. The whole OptionListUtils is over 2.5k lines long and hard to understand.

Right in the beginning of the getOptions function there are a few early return statements for certain cases. My plan is to refactor all those use-cases out into their own functions, as there is no use in adding a includeXYC parameter to getOptions just to do:

getOptions(...) {
  if (includeXYC) {
    return computeResultsForXYC()
  }
}

The first use case I tackled is moving the category option list into its own utility.

Fixed Issues

$ #51954
PROPOSAL: #51954 (comment)

Tests

  • Verify that all unit tests are passing
  • Verify that the category search is still working:
    • Open the settings of a workspace you're admin of
    • Click on Categories
    • Select a category
    • Search in the children of that category

Offline tests

Same as testing

QA Steps

Same as testing

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 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
CleanShot.2024-11-08.at.12.57.33.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
CleanShot.2024-11-08.at.12.57.33.mp4
iOS: Native
CleanShot.2024-11-08.at.12.57.33.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
CleanShot.2024-11-08.at.12.57.33.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
CleanShot.2024-11-08.at.12.57.33.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
CleanShot.2024-11-08.at.12.57.33.mp4

@hannojg hannojg force-pushed the cleanup/optionlistutils branch from f7635a3 to 1aebb87 Compare November 8, 2024 11:24
@hannojg hannojg mentioned this pull request Nov 8, 2024
50 tasks
@hannojg hannojg marked this pull request as ready for review November 8, 2024 11:59
@hannojg hannojg requested a review from a team as a code owner November 8, 2024 11:59
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from grgia and removed request for a team November 8, 2024 12:00
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 8, 2024

@grgia 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]

Copy link
Contributor

@grgia grgia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looking good, few clarifying comments first

src/components/CategoryPicker.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
if (numberOfEnabledCategories < CONST.CATEGORY_LIST_THRESHOLD) {
const data = getCategoryOptionTree(filteredCategories, false, selectedOptionsWithDisabledState);
categorySections.push({
// "All" section when items amount less than the threshold
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you explain this comment?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh I see, these are the sections comments- maybe instead of const data we should use the variable name to make this clearer

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

hm agree, this is just copied over code from how it was previously used. Do we need to make this change in this PR?

@@ -0,0 +1,282 @@
// eslint-disable-next-line you-dont-need-lodash-underscore/get
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why do we need lodash get here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

to be fair, idk, this is copied over from the previously existing code. I think the lodashGet function simplifies a rather complicated nested lookup for us here (we'd need to write our own helper function for this case)

@grgia grgia requested a review from ahmedGaber93 November 13, 2024 12:18
@grgia
Copy link
Contributor

grgia commented Nov 13, 2024

Assigning @ahmedGaber93 from the issue

@ahmedGaber93
Copy link
Contributor

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 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
20241113121125823.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
20241113121455360.mp4
iOS: Native
20241113113737065.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
20241113113118044.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
20241113111351972.mp4
20241113112519895.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
20241113121538660.mp4

@ahmedGaber93
Copy link
Contributor

I think we need to rename file tests/unit/CategoryOptionListUtils.ts to tests/unit/CategoryOptionListUtilsTest.ts

Copy link
Contributor

@ahmedGaber93 ahmedGaber93 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! Just small change is needed here #52250 (comment)

Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 13, 2024

🎯 @ahmedGaber93, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

An E/App issue has been created to issue payment here: #52500.

const smallWrongSearchResultList: OptionsListUtils.CategoryTreeSection[] = [
const smallWrongSearchResultList: OptionsListUtils.CategorySection[] = [
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm! I think this part may still need more cleans, we use type CategorySection[] in tags and other places that not related to categories. I think we can rename CategorySection. It is not having any attributes related to category, it is just related to it is a section. WDYT?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah, let me think about the naming. I think there the word "Category" is used here in two different senses. agree, lets get clear on the naming!

Copy link
Contributor Author

@hannojg hannojg Nov 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

agree, renamed it to Section 👍

@ahmedGaber93
Copy link
Contributor

All yours. @grgia

@grgia grgia merged commit 429a8fc into Expensify:main Nov 22, 2024
17 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.

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/grgia in version: 9.0.66-0 🚀

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

Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.0.66-8 🚀

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

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.

4 participants