Fix: Selected category moves to the top when category list size is under 8

[tienifr]

Details

When category list length is under 8, selected category should remain its position in alphabetic order within the list. Otherwise, it moves to the top.

Fixed Issues

$ #36912
PROPOSAL:

Tests

1. In OD, make sure the category list size is under 8
2. In ND, create a money request with any category
3. Verify the category list is sorted in alphabetic order, including the selected one
4. In OD, make sure the category list size is from 8 and above
5. In ND, verify selected category is on top of the list

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

NA

QA Steps

1. In OD, make sure the category list size is under 8
2. In ND, create a money request with any category
3. Verify the category list is sorted in alphabetic order, including the selected one
4. In OD, make sure the category list size is from 8 and above
5. In ND, verify selected category is on top of the list

• 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 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(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 form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label 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: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[melvin-bot]

@eVoloshchak 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]

[tienifr]

@eVoloshchak Please reassign to @DylanDylann since he was the C+ of the original issue causing this regresison.

[tienifr]

@DylanDylann There's one small edge case when the list size change from < 8 to >= 8, the selected option moves to the top but the highlight does not:

I tried reverting the changes in this PR and #35922 but that did not solve the problem. Seems like it was already there before thus out of scope of this PR.

[barros001]

@tienifr as the person that originally worked on the solution above, I'll take the liberty to drop a comment here. There's an edge case where a deleted category that's currently selected won't show on the list. That's because the deleted category is present in selectedOptions but not in sortedCategories. That's why I originally had the unshift line:

        if (enabledAndSelectedCategoriesIndex === -1) {
            enabledAndSelectedCategories.unshift(selectedOption);
        } else {
            enabledAndSelectedCategories.splice(enabledAndSelectedCategoriesIndex, 1, selectedOption);
        }

The only thing is by doing the above, any deleted category will always be at the top of the list which even as an edge case I don't think we would want. As with the other bug you mentioned, this bug was already present and thus out of scope, but I wanted to drop a comment here so we don't forget about it. I'd be glad to tackle it if we decide opening up a new issue.

[tienifr]

I tested on production and verified that we always hide deleted category because it will not be returned from the backend, thus no data in Onyx. And in case this turns out to be an issue, I think it is out of scope and should be handled separately.

[barros001]

This is staging with more than 8 categories. Right now if we drop to, say, 4 categories, the deleted category is still there, at the top. After merging this PR, it would no longer be there.

And in case this turns out to be an issue, I think it is out of scope and should be handled separately.

My thought as well, this issue was there before the original PR. I just wanted to drop say something so it's not forgotten.

[tienifr]

This is staging with more than 8 categories.

Original PR has already been deployed to staging so you will always see the selected catagory no matter it was deleted/disabled or not. We should test on production to verify the correct results before that PR.

[barros001]

I understand that. And if you checkout master to the commit right before the original PR, the deleted category will NOT be there when there are less than 8 categories, but it WILL when there are more. It's an old bug that's been there already for quite a while. It's not related to this PR nor the original PR. My intention is to bring up a new bug I stumbled upon and by no means I'm implying your PR caused it nor that it should be fixed as part of this one.

[tienifr]

but it WILL when there are more

Oh thanks for that information, I wasn't aware of that. So let's see what @DylanDylann's point on this?

TL;DR Do we need to show the SELECTED but DELETED category in the list? On production, it's hidden when list size < 8 but shown otherwise and it's definitely a bug. If you think it is out of scope of this PR, please somehow report it.

[DylanDylann]

@eVoloshchak please ignore this PR, It is a regression from another issue. So I will review it

[tienifr]

Pending confirmation in #36912 (comment).

[Julesssss]

Closing as discussed here. Please comment in the issue if you believe partial payment would be required.