Repository navigation
update MentionUserRenderer.tsx display text - #38957
Conversation
|
@sobitneupane 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] |
sobitneupane
left a comment
sobitneupane
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Screenshots/Videos
Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop
sobitneupane
left a comment
sobitneupane
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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 Issuessection 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
Testssection - I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the
QA stepssection - 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 verified the steps for local testing are in the
- 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.
toggleReportand notonIconClick). - 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
- 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.
- 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 usingAvatarhave 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
thisproperly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. foronClick={this.submit}the methodthis.submitshould be bound tothisin the constructor) - Any internal methods bound to
thisare necessary to be bound (i.e. avoidthis.submit = this.submit.bind(this);ifthis.submitis never passed to a component event handler likeonClick) - 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
Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris 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
Designlabel so the design team can review the changes.
- If a new page is added, I verified it's using the
ScrollViewcomponent to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page. - If the
mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps. - I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.
| // eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/prefer-nullish-coalescing | ||
| displayNameOrLogin = PersonalDetailsUtils.getDisplayNameOrDefault(user, LocalePhoneNumber.formatPhoneNumber(user?.login ?? '')); | ||
| displayNameOrLogin = LocalePhoneNumber.formatPhoneNumber(user?.login ?? '') || PersonalDetailsUtils.getDisplayNameOrDefault(user); | ||
| displayNameOrLogin = Str.removeSMSDomain(getMentionDisplayText(displayNameOrLogin, htmlAttributeAccountID, user?.login ?? '')); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This seems good, but I'm a little confused about what getMentionDisplayText is doing here. Can we clean it up too?
For example, it doesn't look like we ever actually pass the third argument (userLogin) to getMentionDisplayText.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We add
getMentionDisplayText here to handle shortened mentions, and this is its job on email-based mention, so we decide to reuse it here rather than duplicate its code.
it doesn't look like we ever actually pass the third argument (
userLogin).
We actually pass it in this PR to return early if displayText is not an email, but we ever pass it before because we don't need it for email-based mention, as it important only for accountID-based mention.
And about clean getMentionDisplayText, this function job is to handle shortened mentions so we can rename it to returnShortMentionIfFound, and the return early inside it is related to accountID-based so we can move to its code logic.
// replace `getMentionDisplayText` with function do its job.
const returnShortMentionIfFound = (userLogin) => {
// If the emails are not in the same private domain, we also return the displayText
if (!LoginUtils.areEmailsFromSamePrivateDomain(userLogin, currentUserPersonalDetails.login ?? '')) {
return userLogin;
}
// Otherwise, the emails must be of the same private domain, so we should remove the domain part
return userLogin.split('@')[0];
};
// accountID-based code will be
if (user?.login) {
displayNameOrLogin = Str.isSMSLogin(user?.login) ? LocalePhoneNumber.formatPhoneNumber(user?.login) : returnShortMentionIfFound(user?.login)
}else{
displayNameOrLogin = PersonalDetailsUtils.getDisplayNameOrDefault(user);
}
// in email-based mention replace `getMentionDisplayText` with `returnShortMentionIfFound`This will make the code more clean but require a bit of changes more than the current shorthand.
What do you think @puneetlath ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like that approach.
So then we could do something like:
displayNameOrLogin = LocalePhoneNumber.formatPhoneNumber(user?.login ?? '') || PersonalDetailsUtils.getDisplayNameOrDefault(user);
mentionDisplayText = Str.removeSMSDomain(getShortMentionIfFound(displayNameOrLogin, htmlAttributeAccountID, user?.login ?? ''));
What do you think @sobitneupane?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@puneetlath I am okay with renaming the function's and variable's name.
For the code that you are suggesting here, I think we will need the current implementation of getShortMentionIfFound, right @ahmedGaber93 ?
For the code that @ahmedGaber93 has suggested, we need to first determine whether the displayNameorLogin is login or not and call the getShortMentionIfFound function only if displayNameorLogin is login.
IMO, the better idea is to let getShortMentionIfFound to handle the logic completely(current implementation).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we will need the current implementation of getShortMentionIfFound, right @ahmedGaber93 ?
@sobitneupane Yes, in this case here, we need the current implementation with return early displayText condition.
Another point in the cleanup, I don't think we need Str.removeSMSDomain because formatPhoneNumber will do the job, and also the second parameter (this will cause a regression when login is empty)userAccountID in getMentionDisplayText we can use userLogin undefined check
deleted change
// getShortMentionIfFound return early `displayText` condition
-if (userAccountID && userLogin !== displayText) {
+if (!!userLogin && userLogin !== displayText) {
return displayText;
}
// accountID-based
-getShortMentionIfFound(displayNameOrLogin, htmlAttributeAccountID, user?.login ?? '');
+getShortMentionIfFound(displayNameOrLogin, user?.login ?? '');
// in email-based
-getShortMentionIfFound(displayNameOrLogin, htmlAttributeAccountID);
+getShortMentionIfFound(displayNameOrLogin);There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok sounds good. My main point is that if we can consolidate/clean up some of this logic while we are here, I think we should.
|
@puneetlath looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the |
|
✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release. |
|
Tests were passing when I merged and are still passing now. |
|
🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 1.4.59-0 🚀
|
|
@ahmedGaber93 @puneetlath @sobitneupane I believe this PR caused this blocker #39426 |
Replied in issue page #39426 (comment) |
|
🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.4.60-13 🚀
|
6 participants
Details
Fixed Issues
$ #38079
PROPOSAL: #38079 (comment)
Tests
Heads up, `@mentionDisplayText` isn't a member of this room.@mentionDisplayTextdisplay @email not @display name.@mentionDisplayTextdisplay@usernamenot@username@privateDomain.com.Offline tests
N/A.
QA Steps
Same as Tests step.
PR Author Checklist
### Fixed Issuessection aboveTestssectionOffline stepssectionQA stepssectiontoggleReportand notonIconClick)myBool && <MyComponent />.src/languages/*files and using the translation methodSTYLE.md) were followedAvatar, I verified the components usingAvatarare working as expected)StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris working as expected in all cases)Designlabel and/or tagged@Expensify/designso the design team can review the changes.ScrollViewcomponent to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps.Screenshots/Videos
Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2024-03-25.at.8.09.13.PM.mov
Screen.Recording.2024-03-25.at.8.02.42.PM.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2024-03-25.at.8.16.02.PM.mov
Screen.Recording.2024-03-25.at.8.19.25.PM.mov