Add prefer-at condition to eslint by zfurtak · Pull Request #49534 · Expensify/App

zfurtak · 2024-09-20T12:53:52Z

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #43055
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Log in to the app
Try to open workspace, add an expense in it
Check list of members in the workspace
Open chosen chat, try to send attachment, write a message with emoji (change skin colour of emojis)
It's good to check different functionalities of the app as this PR is changing a lot of files

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

n/a

QA Steps

Like above
It's important to check many different parts of the app

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

ios.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios-web.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-09-23.at.18.31.19.mov

VickyStash

Reviewing... 📝

Kicu

Related to this comment: #49534 (comment) and, more general - default icon and avatars, a few cents from me.

First of all I agree with Błażej to improve naming. This should be correctly named fallbackIcon and not a defaultIcon.

Second of all we cannot treat this:

    source: FallbackAvatar,
    type: CONST.ICON_TYPE_AVATAR,

as universal fallback icon everywhere, because this is specifically a fallback Avatar, not a "default" icon or avatar.

This means that if something is to display a different TYPE of icon, and we fallback to FallbackAvatar then it might be incorrect.
For the record this is fallback avatar:

As you can see displaying this image in place of for example something report or workspace related might be problematic.

Because of ☝️ my suggestion would be:

do not add default value for mainAvatar inside SubscriptAvatar
do not create a separate file with fallbackIcon

Even though defaulting mainAvatar sounds like a good idea, it will hide a lot of wrong usages of SubscriptAvatar.
I think we should go case by case and verify where the fallback value is even needed. I did a quick check and found several usages where we don't have to fallback, but instead we should refactor code:

in OptionRow we have this check: {!!option.icons?.length && ... so we don't have to even display Avatar if there is no icons - we should clean this code and not fallback
in MenuItem we have floatRightAvatars?.length > 0 - same as above

Everywhere else define fallbackIcon locally and use it for the specific files.

melvin-bot · 2024-10-01T15:45:00Z

@eh2077 @roryabraham One of you needs to 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]

roryabraham

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: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

roryabraham · 2024-10-01T16:51:00Z

As discussed in slack, I've done only some basic smoke testing here, because this PR is too large to practically test in full. Fortunately, it should only make things safer in general, so the risk isn't too high.

If it doesn't work though, I think rather than trying again, we should just move it to the lint config for changed files.

roryabraham · 2024-10-01T18:12:46Z

ignoring changed-files lint because this PR is too big

melvin-bot · 2024-10-01T18:12:52Z

@roryabraham looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

OSBotify · 2024-10-01T18:23:31Z

✋ 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 · 2024-10-02T00:31:54Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.0.43-0 🚀

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

github-actions · 2024-10-02T01:10:34Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.0.43-0 🚀

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

rushatgabhane · 2024-10-02T08:19:44Z

@roryabraham @zfurtak i believe the eslint rule is incorrectly applied?

delegators is an array of object here.

blazejkustra · 2024-10-02T09:00:03Z

@rushatgabhane Do you get the same result when running npm run lint? Ensure you reinstalled the modules 🙏

Beamanator · 2024-10-02T19:43:01Z

-        visibleReportActionItems[reportID] = reportActionsForDisplay[reportActionsForDisplay.length - 1];
+        const reportAction = reportActionsForDisplay.at(-1);
+        if (!reportAction) {
+            return;


Possibly causing a few deploy blockers - see https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1727897048691219?thread_ts=1727893876.168179&cid=C01GTK53T8Q

github-actions · 2024-10-03T03:34:45Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 9.0.43-6 🚀

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

eh2077 · 2025-05-23T15:43:59Z


-    const reportIDSegment = pathSegments[1];
-    const hasRouteReportActionID = !Number.isNaN(Number(pathSegments[2]));
+    const reportIDSegment = pathSegments.at(1);


This caused issue

[Due for payment 2025-05-27] [$250] Expense - Expense report disappears from LHN after opening transaction thread header in RHP #60749

zfurtak added 10 commits September 20, 2024 13:52

Changed [] to at()

9d252e8

Removed unnecessary files

821199c

Removed unnecessary files

dd5bda1

Fixed ts issues

c5a6703

Fixed eslint issues

3f8676a

Fixed tsc check

d1776d3

Fixed lint

f8fbbcc

Fixed eslint changed files check

a5bc7a4

Fixed performance tests

a240b40

Merge main

c29ede6