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

Jump to bottom

[TS migration] Migrate 'WalletStatementModal' component to TypeScript #31832

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 30, 2023
Merged

[TS migration] Migrate 'WalletStatementModal' component to TypeScript #31832

merged 3 commits into from
Nov 30, 2023

Conversation

VickyStash
Copy link
Contributor

@VickyStash VickyStash commented Nov 24, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Details

[TS migration] Migrate 'WalletStatementModal' component to TypeScript

Fixed Issues

$ #25131
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

It's not possible to test it on DEV due to CSP policy. If you try to open statement on DEV you will get the next error:

Refused to frame 'https://www.expensify.com/' because an ancestor violates the following Content Security Policy directive: "frame-ancestors https://we.are.expensify.com www.expensify.com https://new.expensify.com".
web_error1

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PROD QA:

  1. Access the statement using the URL https://new.expensify.com/statements/202308. For mobile platforms, you can send this link to any E/App chat and open it by clicking on it there.
    That's what you should see:

image

  1. Make sure the statement modal works the same way as before.

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 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

Not possible to test on DEV, see the Tests section.

Android: mWeb Chrome

Not possible to test on DEV, see the Tests section.

iOS: Native

Not possible to test on DEV, see the Tests section.

iOS: mWeb Safari

Not possible to test on DEV, see the Tests section.

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Not possible to test on DEV, see the Tests section.

MacOS: Desktop

Not possible to test on DEV, see the Tests section.

kubabutkiewicz
kubabutkiewicz approved these changes Nov 27, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@kubabutkiewicz kubabutkiewicz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

fabioh8010
fabioh8010 reviewed Nov 27, 2023
View reviewed changes
src/components/WalletStatementModal/index.tsx
@@ -51,7 +45,7 @@ function WalletStatementModal({statementPageURL, session}) {
title="Statements"
height="100%"
width="100%"
seamless="seamless"
seamless
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

is seamless now a boolean prop?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@fabioh8010 Yeah, it looks so
image

@VickyStash VickyStash marked this pull request as ready for review November 29, 2023 11:08
@VickyStash VickyStash requested a review from a team as a code owner November 29, 2023 11:08
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from cubuspl42 and removed request for a team November 29, 2023 11:08
@melvin-bot Melvin Bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 29, 2023

@cubuspl42 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]

cubuspl42
cubuspl42 reviewed Nov 30, 2023
View reviewed changes
src/components/WalletStatementModal/index.native.tsx Outdated
import {walletStatementDefaultProps, walletStatementPropTypes} from './WalletStatementModalPropTypes';
import type {WalletStatementOnyxProps, WalletStatementProps} from './types';

type WebViewNavigationEvent = WebViewNavigation & {type?: ValueOf<typeof CONST.WALLET.WEB_MESSAGE_TYPE>};
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Interesting. Do you think that we might benefit from making CONST.js more TypeScript-friendly? It looks like we might find some uses for TypeScript enums.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okey, I've just checked and we have a lint against enums...

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Still, the question holds. While I appreciate the ValueOf magic, I'm wondering if making things more TypeScriptish on the CONST.ts side could help with making this less magical.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@VickyStash You could extract ValueOf<typeof CONST.WALLET.WEB_MESSAGE_TYPE> to a separate type.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@cubuspl42 It's something that goes from TS_STYLE guide, so I'm not sure that we should change it.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Still, the question holds. While I appreciate the ValueOf magic, I'm wondering if making things more TypeScriptish on the CONST.ts side could help with making this less magical.

Once the codebase is completely written in TS, we can rewrite CONST.ts more safely, for now let's keep it as it is.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fine 👍

@cubuspl42
Copy link
Contributor

The code looks good 👍 I'll proceed with the checklist.

@cubuspl42
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 / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / 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 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 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(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 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

Web
Mobile Web - Chrome
Mobile Web - Safari
Desktop
iOS
Android

@melvin-bot Melvin Bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 30, 2023

We did not find an internal engineer to review this PR, trying to assign a random engineer to #25131 as well as to this PR... Please reach out for help on Slack if no one gets assigned!

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from blimpich November 30, 2023 12:50
@cubuspl42
Copy link
Contributor

@blimpich

It's not possible to test it on DEV due to CSP policy.

Do you consider it acceptable that we test this when it hits prod? Or, maybe, would it be possible to update the CSP policy, so we can test this on staging?

blimpich
blimpich approved these changes Nov 30, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@blimpich blimpich left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@cubuspl42 in this instance, yes I think its okay. Code looks very straightforward and I checked out the branch on my machine (which doesn't have the CSP issue since i have the whole backend setup locally) and checked to make sure nothing seemed obviously off. I feel pretty comfortable QA-ing this in prod.

@blimpich blimpich merged commit be28950 into Expensify:main Nov 30, 2023
17 of 19 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.

@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Dec 1, 2023
Closed
53 tasks
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Dec 1, 2023

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 1.4.7-0 🚀

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

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2023
Closed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Dec 5, 2023

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/yuwenmemon in version: 1.4.7-4 🚀

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@blazejkustra blazejkustra blazejkustra approved these changes

@kubabutkiewicz kubabutkiewicz kubabutkiewicz approved these changes

@fabioh8010 fabioh8010 fabioh8010 approved these changes

@blimpich blimpich blimpich approved these changes

@cubuspl42 cubuspl42 cubuspl42 approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@VickyStash @cubuspl42 @OSBotify @blimpich @fabioh8010 @kubabutkiewicz @blazejkustra