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

Fix - Update getIOUReportActionDisplayMessage() to accept the transaction as a parameter #38882

Conversation

FitseTLT
Copy link
Contributor

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #38355
PROPOSAL: #38355 (comment)

Tests

Note: This is a refactoring pr so what we need to check is that things mentioned below work fine same as current main

  1. Press on the FAB and request money
  2. finish the flow and create a money request
  3. Press on the preview that contains the request
  4. When the iou report opens on the money request action corresponding to the request you createdin (2) select copy to clipboard
  5. Now paste and verify that the money amount and the message is correct
  • 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(themeColors.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
nat.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
and.web.mp4
iOS: Native
ios.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
w.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
d.mp4

@FitseTLT FitseTLT requested a review from a team as a code owner March 23, 2024 19:05
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from hoangzinh and removed request for a team March 23, 2024 19:05
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 23, 2024

@hoangzinh 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]

@FitseTLT
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hoangzinh @tgolen I am having difficulty coming up with a report action that is displayed with ReportActionItemMessage which utilizes iouMessage we calculate here

iouMessage = ReportUtils.getIOUReportActionDisplayMessage(action, transaction);
}

All the report actions we calculate the message via the linked transactions are all displayed with MoneyRequestAction
if (
isIOUReport(action) &&
action.originalMessage &&
// For the pay flow, we only want to show MoneyRequestAction when sending money. When paying, we display a regular system message
(action.originalMessage.type === CONST.IOU.REPORT_ACTION_TYPE.CREATE ||
action.originalMessage.type === CONST.IOU.REPORT_ACTION_TYPE.SPLIT ||
action.originalMessage.type === CONST.IOU.REPORT_ACTION_TYPE.TRACK ||
isSendingMoney)
) {
// There is no single iouReport for bill splits, so only 1:1 requests require an iouReportID
const iouReportID = action.originalMessage.IOUReportID ? action.originalMessage.IOUReportID.toString() : '0';
children = (
<MoneyRequestAction

I feel like may be it an obsolete code but it would be nice if you can give me one instance I can test with. TIA

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

Can you try with paid message?

  1. User A requests money to User B
  2. User B does "pay elsewhere"
  3. Verify it's displaying "paid XXX elsewhere"

@FitseTLT
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can you try with paid message?

  1. User A requests money to User B
  2. User B does "pay elsewhere"
  3. Verify it's displaying "paid XXX elsewhere"

Thx for the help! But sorry if I haven't made it clear, indeed there are instances where getIOUReportActionDisplayMessage is executed like the one you mentioned but it doesn't pass this early return

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Lines 5136 to 5137 in 85d761b

return Localize.translateLocal(translationKey, {amount: formattedAmount, payer: ''});
}

It doesn't utilize transaction param which is relevant to this PR here

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Lines 5139 to 5140 in 85d761b

const transactionDetails = getTransactionDetails(!isEmptyObject(transaction) ? transaction : null);
const formattedAmount = CurrencyUtils.convertToDisplayString(transactionDetails?.amount ?? 0, transactionDetails?.currency);

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

I see, I couldn't find a case to test it either. Let's wait for @tgolen

@tgolen
Copy link
Contributor

tgolen commented Mar 25, 2024

Yes, I believe I ran into this when I was first looking at the code as well, so thank you for confirming it. I couldn't find anyway of triggering the logic either, but I was fearful there was just something I didn't know or was perhaps overlooking. I think what the safest thing to do would be:

  • Remove getIOUReportActionDisplayMessage() completely
  • Replace the spot where it was called in ReportActionItem.tsx with a Log.alert() (I think that's the right method) that will at least log something in our server logs if that path is called by anything (and let's add enough data to the log so we know why the code path was triggered and not caught by the earlier logic in the if statement)
  • Create a follow-up GH to check for the server logs in 2-4 weeks
  • If there were no logs triggered, then we do a final cleanup to remove the logic completely
  • If there were logs triggered, I guess we need to keep digging

It's also possible that when the first step is done, QA will be able to find a regression with it. In that case, it would be a faster way of getting to the final end goal of having this code cleaned up.

What do you think of that plan?

@FitseTLT
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes, I believe I ran into this when I was first looking at the code as well, so thank you for confirming it. I couldn't find anyway of triggering the logic either, but I was fearful there was just something I didn't know or was perhaps overlooking. I think what the safest thing to do would be:

  • Remove getIOUReportActionDisplayMessage() completely
  • Replace the spot where it was called in ReportActionItem.tsx with a Log.alert() (I think that's the right method) that will at least log something in our server logs if that path is called by anything (and let's add enough data to the log so we know why the code path was triggered and not caught by the earlier logic in the if statement)
  • Create a follow-up GH to check for the server logs in 2-4 weeks
  • If there were no logs triggered, then we do a final cleanup to remove the logic completely
  • If there were logs triggered, I guess we need to keep digging

It's also possible that when the first step is done, QA will be able to find a regression with it. In that case, it would be a faster way of getting to the final end goal of having this code cleaned up.

What do you think of that plan?

BTW it is not getIOUReportActionDisplayMessage() call in ReportActionItemMessage that is in doubt here, only the transaction param is what I haven't found to be useful. For instance payed message @hoangzinh mentioned already uses it but couldn't come up with one that uses the transaction param, so I am suspecting transaction prop in ReportActionItemMessage might not be needed. I mean there is no bad logic in the current main; before transaction wasn't a parameter so no need to worry whenever it is need it will be accessed in the function but now that it is a param we have more burden in terms of whether the param is needed in all instances or not; we might need to make it optional and not pass it when we call it from ReportActionItemMessage.

Regarding BE logging you are suggesting why don't we just pass the param from ReportActionItemMessage so that there will be no regression (obviously regression means a penalty for us 😄 ) So we can an extra param like isCalledFromReportAction so inside getIOUReportActionDisplayMessage before the code that we utilize transaction param when isCalledFromReportAction is true we log in the BE and In a follow up PR if there is no log after weeks we can remove the transaction prop and don't pass it from there anymore. WDYT

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

In ReportActionItemMessage that is in doubt here, only the transaction param is what I haven't found to be useful

Hold-on @FitseTLT I think it's still useful in case copy-to-clipboard, isn't it?

} else if (ReportActionsUtils.isMoneyRequestAction(reportAction)) {
const displayMessage = ReportUtils.getIOUReportActionDisplayMessage(reportAction);
Clipboard.setString(displayMessage);

@FitseTLT
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yep @hoangzinh I mentioned it here

getIOUReportActionDisplayMessage() call in ReportActionItemMessage that is in doubt here

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

we might need to make it optional and not pass it when we call it from ReportActionItemMessage.

@FitseTLT Thanks for confirming. Reg. your point, I prefer to split it out instead of making it optional. For example, split those logic intos a function

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Lines 5132 to 5150 in 9dd66cf

// The `REPORT_ACTION_TYPE.PAY` action type is used for both fulfilling existing requests and sending money. To
// differentiate between these two scenarios, we check if the `originalMessage` contains the `IOUDetails`
// property. If it does, it indicates that this is a 'Send money' action.
const {amount, currency} = originalMessage.IOUDetails ?? originalMessage;
const formattedAmount = CurrencyUtils.convertToDisplayString(Math.abs(amount), currency) ?? '';
switch (originalMessage.paymentType) {
case CONST.IOU.PAYMENT_TYPE.ELSEWHERE:
translationKey = 'iou.paidElsewhereWithAmount';
break;
case CONST.IOU.PAYMENT_TYPE.EXPENSIFY:
case CONST.IOU.PAYMENT_TYPE.VBBA:
translationKey = 'iou.paidWithExpensifyWithAmount';
break;
default:
translationKey = 'iou.payerPaidAmount';
break;
}
return Localize.translateLocal(translationKey, {amount: formattedAmount, payer: ''});

Then use it in the ReportActionItemMessage and getIOUReportActionDisplayMessage. But the fact that, we might cause regression bugs for cases that we haven't known yet.

@FitseTLT
Copy link
Contributor Author

Nice @hoangzinh But if we are going to utilize BE log then we should separate it after we confirm that transaction is not needed from when we call it from ReportActionItemMessage via the BE Log 👍

@tgolen
Copy link
Contributor

tgolen commented Mar 26, 2024

OK, I understatnd what you mean about the transaction param now. I misunderstood originally and glad that you found some flows that still hit that logic. It sounds like we are aligned on a path forward and we can utilize the BE log to ensure there are no regressions, then come back later and remove the transaction param.

@FitseTLT
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hoangzinh U can proceed on the review, I have added the server logging code 👍

Comment on lines 129 to 130
const originalMessage = action?.actionName === CONST.REPORT.ACTIONS.TYPE.IOU ? action.originalMessage : null;
return `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${originalMessage?.IOUTransactionID ?? 0}`;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should it be

Suggested change
const originalMessage = action?.actionName === CONST.REPORT.ACTIONS.TYPE.IOU ? action.originalMessage : null;
return `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${originalMessage?.IOUTransactionID ?? 0}`;
return `${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.TRANSACTION}${action?.originalMessage?.IOUTransactionID ?? ''}`;

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 I know but it is to avoid TS error; it used in all other places too. I guess it is better than suppressing the ts error

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh right, then is it possible to reuse ReportActionUtils.getLinkedTransactionID 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.

Couldn't that lead us to conflict with the purpose of this pr as the function uses allReportActions to get the action

const reportAction = allReportActions?.[reportID]?.[reportActionID];

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm, wish it accepted a reportAction input. The idea here is centralize how we get a transactionID from a reportAction

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi @FitseTLT I'm thinking should we create another util, getLinkedTransactionIDFromReportAction. In PR checklist, we have a checkbox about DRY code.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done

@FitseTLT FitseTLT requested a review from hoangzinh March 29, 2024 12:05
@hoangzinh
Copy link
Contributor

hoangzinh commented Mar 29, 2024

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
Screen.Recording.2024-03-31.at.09.58.44.android.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2024-03-31.at.10.05.29.android.chrome.mov
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2024-03-31.at.09.55.23.ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-03-31.at.09.52.09.ios.safari.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-03-31.at.09.47.06.web.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2024-03-31.at.09.49.24.desktop.mov

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@FitseTLT FitseTLT requested a review from hoangzinh April 2, 2024 10:00
Copy link
Contributor

@hoangzinh hoangzinh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from tgolen April 2, 2024 14:08
tgolen
tgolen previously approved these changes Apr 2, 2024
src/libs/ReportUtils.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/libs/ReportUtils.ts Show resolved Hide resolved
@tgolen tgolen dismissed their stale review April 2, 2024 14:42

Oops, sorry... that should have been a "requested changes" review

@FitseTLT FitseTLT requested a review from tgolen April 2, 2024 15:07
src/libs/ReportUtils.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@FitseTLT
Copy link
Contributor Author

FitseTLT commented Apr 3, 2024

Also logged reportActionID U can proceed @tgolen

@tgolen tgolen merged commit ff492c4 into Expensify:main Apr 3, 2024
15 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Apr 3, 2024

✋ 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 Apr 8, 2024

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.4.60-13 🚀

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.

4 participants