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 loading skeleton appears in the workspace expense thread after sending an IOU expense request #46864

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Aug 9, 2024

Conversation

tsa321
Copy link
Contributor

@tsa321 tsa321 commented Aug 6, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #40937
PROPOSAL: #40937 (comment)

Tests

Precondition:

  1. In the workspace chat, there are already some expenses, for example, 5.
  2. Open the workspace chat and click on each expense preview to view the transaction details report.

Test:

  1. From the main workspace chat, submit an expense request using the + button on the left side of the composer.
  2. Complete the expense request submission process.
  3. Click on the expense preview in the main workspace chat to open the report with all expense previews.
  4. Click on the 3rd expense preview from the last expense message/last expense preview. This will open the transaction thread report.
  5. Immediately go back by clicking on the header link.
  6. Verify that there is no loading skeleton in the report and that the message loads immediately.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Precondition:

  1. In the workspace chat, there are already some expenses, for example, 5.
  2. Open the workspace chat and click on each expense preview to view the transaction details report.

Test:

  1. From the main workspace chat, submit an expense request using the + button on the left side of the composer.
  2. Complete the expense request submission process.
  3. Click on the expense preview in the main workspace chat to open the report with all expense previews.
  4. Click on the 3rd expense preview from the last expense message/last expense preview. This will open the transaction thread report.
  5. Immediately go back by clicking on the header link.
  6. Verify that there is no loading skeleton in the report and that the message loads immediately.
  • 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 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
android-native-d.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android-mweb_d.mp4
iOS: Native
ios-native_d.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios-msfari_d.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
macos-web-d.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
macos-desktop_d.mp4

@tsa321 tsa321 requested a review from a team as a code owner August 6, 2024 09:53
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from jjcoffee and removed request for a team August 6, 2024 09:53
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 6, 2024

@jjcoffee 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]

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Aug 6, 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
android-app-2024-08-07_16.51.28.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android-chrome-2024-08-07_16.54.53.mp4
iOS: Native
ios-app-2024-08-07_16.46.31.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios-safari-2024-08-07_16.44.57.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
desktop-chrome-2024-08-07_15.59.49.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
desktop-app-2024-08-07_16.26.16.mp4

isLoadingReportOnyx ||
!isCurrentReportLoadedFromOnyx ||
isLoading;
(isLinkingToMessage && !isLinkedMessagePageReady) || (!isLinkingToMessage && !isInitialPageReady) || isLoadingReportOnyx || !isCurrentReportLoadedFromOnyx || isLoading;
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 a bit more why you made this change? I see you mentioned it here, but since it was never part of your proposal, I'd like to get a better understanding of why the change is needed.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@tsa321 tsa321 Aug 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@jjcoffee I remove this (!!reportActionIDFromRoute && !!reportMetadata?.isLoadingInitialReportActions) || condition.

After the changes made here in my previous PR:

{!shouldShowSkeleton && (
<ReportActionsView

the blank list will no longer be displayed; instead, the loading skeleton will appear. I updated the code so that the ReportActionsView depends on shouldShowSkeleton rather than shouldShowReportActionsList. The previous code can be found here:

{shouldShowReportActionList && (
<ReportActionsView
reportActions={reportActions}
report={report}
parentReportAction={parentReportAction}
isLoadingInitialReportActions={reportMetadata?.isLoadingInitialReportActions}
isLoadingNewerReportActions={reportMetadata?.isLoadingNewerReportActions}
hasLoadingNewerReportActionsError={reportMetadata?.hasLoadingNewerReportActionsError}
isLoadingOlderReportActions={reportMetadata?.isLoadingOlderReportActions}
hasLoadingOlderReportActionsError={reportMetadata?.hasLoadingOlderReportActionsError}
isReadyForCommentLinking={!shouldShowSkeleton}
transactionThreadReportID={transactionThreadReportID}
/>
)}
{/* Note: The ReportActionsSkeletonView should be allowed to mount even if the initial report actions are not loaded.
If we prevent rendering the report while they are loading then
we'll unnecessarily unmount the ReportActionsView which will clear the new marker lines initial state. */}
{shouldShowSkeleton && <ReportActionsSkeletonView />}

Before my previous PR, both shouldShowSkeleton and shouldShowReportActionsList were true, but ReportSkeletonView was rendered below ReportActionsView. This meant that ReportSkeletonView was hidden behind ReportActionsView. In my previous PR, I removed shouldShowReportActionsList and made the display of ReportActionsView depend on shouldShowSkeleton.


To verify you could try to reproduce the issue in staging. It will display loading skeleton instead of blank list.

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Aug 6, 2024

Thanks for the PR @tsa321 but could you please explain the changes as they don't seem related to your original proposal anymore. Has anything changed that meant the solution could be changed?

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Aug 6, 2024

Continuing with the review tomorrow, as I'm currently having issues getting signed out whilst testing.

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Aug 6, 2024

@tsa321 Sorry could you also clarify why the preconditions are required in your test steps?

@tsa321
Copy link
Contributor Author

tsa321 commented Aug 6, 2024

@jjcoffee, to make the related reports data available in Onyx: if it is not cached in Onyx, the report will not open immediately when accessed. Instead, it will wait for the OpenReport to complete. So the issue will not be reproduced.

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Aug 7, 2024

Just noting that I've reported a separate comment linking bug on Slack here. It is present on staging so not to do with this PR, but involves a fresh sign-in causing the comment to jump around on the screen.

desktop-chrome-2024-08-07_15.42.47.mp4

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Aug 7, 2024

@tsa321 I see on your native recordings you had the same issue where you can't scroll past the comment-linked item. I think this is also reproducible on main, but could you check? Or do you have any ideas how we could quickly fix within this PR?

ISSUE-android-app-2024-08-07_17.25.43.mp4

@tsa321
Copy link
Contributor Author

tsa321 commented Aug 8, 2024

@jjcoffee I have fixed the bug in the latest commit.

In Android, the issue is caused by the following:

const checkIfContentSmallerThanList = useCallback(() => windowHeight - DIFF_BETWEEN_SCREEN_HEIGHT_AND_LIST - SPACER > contentListHeight.current, [windowHeight]);

The contentListHeight.current is 0 when the first loadNewerChats is called. This results in:

const isLoadingOlderReportsFirstNeeded = checkIfContentSmallerThanList() && reportActions.length > 23;

where checkIfContentSmallerThanList becomes incorrect:

if ((reportActionID && indexOfLinkedAction > -1 && !isLoadingOlderReportsFirstNeeded) || (!reportActionID && !isLoadingOlderReportsFirstNeeded)) {
handleReportActionPagination({firstReportActionID: newestReportAction?.reportActionID});
}

Thus, handleReportActionPagination does not get executed.

The contentListHeight.current is updated here:

contentListHeight.current = h;

but in Android, it updates too late when the first loadNewerChats is called. The solution is in my latest commit.

@jjcoffee
Copy link
Contributor

jjcoffee commented Aug 9, 2024

@tsa321 Great detective work! I'm actually thinking now that it might be better to split this out into a new issue as it's not really within scope of this PR (since the issue is there on main) and it would be good to keep it separate in case of regressions. Could you revert the change for now and we'll come back to it as a follow-up?

Signed-off-by: Tsaqif <[email protected]>
@tsa321
Copy link
Contributor Author

tsa321 commented Aug 9, 2024

@jjcoffee I have reverted the last commit

Copy link
Contributor

@jjcoffee jjcoffee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

Note: I've found an issue on main that should be fixed as a follow-up (@tsa321 has a potential solution).

@marcaaron marcaaron merged commit cb7e252 into Expensify:main Aug 9, 2024
16 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Aug 9, 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.

@Beamanator
Copy link
Contributor

FYI I believe this was deployed to prod yesterday, from this checklist - #47219

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.

5 participants