Resolve circular dependencies on JS side

[latekvo]

This PR removes circular dependencies found via:

yarn madge --extensions js,ts,tsx --circular src

[m-bert]

Looks good, let's hear what @j-piasecki has to say 😅

[j-piasecki]

@m-bert I think you mentioned adding a CI workflow dedicated to making sure we don't introduce another cycle by accident, is that happening?

[m-bert]

@j-piasecki Yes, I did mention adding CI workflow 😅 In order for it to make sense we have to get rid of all circular dependencies. At the beginning we didn't care that much about the one connected with Hammer, so it was postponed. Now that I see that we did remove all circular dependencies, I think adding CI workflow would be good idea.

Also, we could add it to pre-commit hook, let me know what do you think.

@latekvo could you add this workflow?

[latekvo]

@m-bert alright, should I add it to this PR, or do you think it deserves one of it's own?

[m-bert]

I think it would be nice to add it in this PR 😅

[m-bert]

Would it be possible to add script in our package.json and then use it here? Like yarn circular-dependency-check. This way it would be easier to run this in our repo (we wouldn't have to remember all those arguments and so on).

[latekvo]

ok, will do

[latekvo]

don't we want a script for both the JS and the native side in this case?
or is this a bit far fetched for now?

[m-bert]

Is madge capable of doing such things?

Also keep in mind that in order to add this script we would have to have 0 circular dependencies on native side (I don't say we have them, that's something that we have to check).

So in conclusion, it would be great to have such script for native, but not in this PR.

[latekvo]

Although madge likely won't work, for kotlin there is a tool called Classycle which could be made into a workflow.

But of course, i don't think doing this in this PR would be a good idea either 😄
I was just asking if it was something you'd like to be done.

[j-piasecki]

I think it could be done, though first, it would be great to check how many of them are in the codebase to have an idea of the effort it would take.

[m-bert]

Suggested change

	"checkForCircularDependencies": "yarn madge --extensions js,ts,tsx --circular src"
	"circularDependencyCheck": "yarn madge --extensions js,ts,tsx --circular src"

I think it is enough, we don't have to overcomplicate that name. Also I think using - as separator is more readable than camelCase, but since we have checkIntegrity script we can leave that (or we can change both, cc @j-piasecki)

[latekvo]

Yep, i agree but preferred to follow the convention instead of having both cases in a single filename next to eachother.

Same for the name, but since you prefer the latter one, I'll change it.

[m-bert]

Okay, I get what you mean by "same for the name" 😅 Currently we have only one script that starts with check so I think it is a bit different compared to - and camelCase. Starting with check prefix isn't that bad, but having many scripts starting with the same prefix would make tab autocomplete a bit frustrating 😅

This is a topic for discussion and I think that following Reanimated convention would be better, but let's hear @j-piasecki opinion on that.

[j-piasecki]

I think we can merge it as is, but create a follow-up that will take care of this, given that we already have a ts-check script (to use dashes instead of camelCase).

[latekvo]

alright

[latekvo]

#2973
@j-piasecki