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.

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

[NoQA] Tests for group chat name #40658

Merged
merged 17 commits into from
Jun 18, 2024
Merged

Conversation

ShridharGoel
Copy link
Contributor

Details

Tests for group chat name.

Fixed Issues

$ #40189
PROPOSAL: #40189 (comment)

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 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 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 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop

@ShridharGoel ShridharGoel requested a review from a team as a code owner April 21, 2024 12:41
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team April 21, 2024 12:41
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Apr 21, 2024

@s77rt 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]

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from s77rt April 21, 2024 12:41
Copy link
Contributor

@s77rt s77rt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • Fix ts errors
  • Add unit test for the following case:
    • getGroupChatName called with report id only and that report does not have a name

Comment on lines 29 to 30
jest.mock('../../src/libs/Notification/LocalNotification');
jest.mock('../../src/components/Icon/Expensicons');
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
jest.mock('../../src/libs/Notification/LocalNotification');
jest.mock('../../src/components/Icon/Expensicons');

Not needed

Comment on lines 122 to 128
// Connect to Pusher
PusherConnectionManager.init();
Pusher.init({
appKey: CONFIG.PUSHER.APP_KEY,
cluster: CONFIG.PUSHER.CLUSTER,
authEndpoint: `${CONFIG.EXPENSIFY.DEFAULT_API_ROOT}api/AuthenticatePusher?`,
});
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
// Connect to Pusher
PusherConnectionManager.init();
Pusher.init({
appKey: CONFIG.PUSHER.APP_KEY,
cluster: CONFIG.PUSHER.CLUSTER,
authEndpoint: `${CONFIG.EXPENSIFY.DEFAULT_API_ROOT}api/AuthenticatePusher?`,
});

Not needed

Comment on lines 155 to 156
let reportActionCreatedDate: string;
let reportAction2CreatedDate: string;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
let reportActionCreatedDate: string;
let reportAction2CreatedDate: string;

We don't need report actions

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented May 1, 2024

Any updates on this?

@ShridharGoel
Copy link
Contributor Author

Will update this by tomorrow.

participantAccountIDs.forEach((id) => {
participants[id] = {
hidden: false,
role: id === 1 ? 'admin' : 'member',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need to set the role here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There should be at least one admin, so it seems good to have the role set.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This would affect other tests that uses this util function. Add the admin participant if needed only on the group test file

const lastVisibleActionCreated = DateUtils.getDBTime(Date.now() - millisecondsInThePast);

const participants: Record<number, Participant> = {};
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
const participants: Record<number, Participant> = {};
const participants: Participants = {};

NAB

participantAccountIDs.forEach((id) => {
participants[id] = {
hidden: false,
role: shouldAddParticipantRole ? (id === 1 ? 'admin' : 'member') : null,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is still not valid for a util function. Not all participants are expected to have the admin using account id 1. Instead of shouldAddParticipantRole use a param that's an array and tells us the account ids of the admins.

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented May 11, 2024

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

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from marcaaron May 11, 2024 12:29
Copy link
Contributor

@marcaaron marcaaron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Tests look nice and thorough! Thanks! Spotted an improvement.

...jest.requireActual<typeof Animated>('react-native-reanimated/mock'),
createAnimatedPropAdapter: jest.fn,
useReducedMotion: jest.fn,
}));
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

App/tests/README.md

Lines 48 to 50 in 957b5ec

## Mocking `node_modules`, user modules, and what belongs in `jest/setup.ts`
If you need to mock a library that exists in `node_modules` then add it to the `__mocks__` folder in the root of the project. More information about this [here](https://jestjs.io/docs/manual-mocks#mocking-node-modules). If you need to mock an individual library you should create a mock module in a `__mocks__` subdirectory adjacent to the library as explained [here](https://jestjs.io/docs/manual-mocks#mocking-user-modules). However, keep in mind that when you do this you also must manually require the mock by calling something like `jest.mock('../../src/libs/Log');` at the top of an individual test file. If every test in the app will need something to be mocked that's a good case for adding it to `jest/setup.ts`, but we should generally avoid adding user mocks or `node_modules` mocks to this file. Please use the `__mocks__` subdirectories wherever appropriate.

Can any of these be moved into __mocks__ or no?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you help with this? I couldn't get how we can include these in __mocks__.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What have you tried?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@ShridharGoel ShridharGoel May 29, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@marcaaron I don't think these could be added to __mocks__.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok that's fine, but can we please add some explanation about why?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Using __mocks__ for @react-native-reanimated.

For LogBox, I tried the below but it didn't work:

const mock = {
    /* eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/naming-convention */
    __esModule: true,
    default: {
        ignoreLogs: jest.fn(),
        ignoreAllLogs: jest.fn(),
    },
};

export default mock;

In @react-navigation/native, it seems we can't move to __mocks__ because transitionEndCB is needed in the test file.

tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented May 16, 2024

@ShridharGoel Can you please address the review comments above and resolve the conflicts

@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor

What's the latest here?

@ShridharGoel
Copy link
Contributor Author

Any idea what can be causing this? All tests are passing when trying one by one locally.

Tests for group chat name › Should show only 5 names when there are 8 participants in the report header

    expect(received).toHaveLength(expected)

    Expected length: 1
    Received length: 2
    Received array:  [{"_fiber": [FiberNode]}, {"_fiber": [FiberNode]}]

      284 |                 const optionRowsHintText = Localize.translateLocal('accessibilityHints.navigatesToChat');
      285 |                 const optionRows = screen.queryAllByAccessibilityHint(optionRowsHintText);
    > 286 |                 expect(optionRows).toHaveLength(1);
          |                                    ^
      287 |
      288 |                 const displayNameHintText = Localize.translateLocal('accessibilityHints.chatUserDisplayNames');
      289 |                 const displayNameText = screen.queryByLabelText(displayNameHintText);

      at toHaveLength (tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx:286:36)

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Jun 4, 2024

After running test A and navigating to the report, we will go into the afterEach phase in which we clear onyx data. At this point the report is still focused and the report getting removed causes the useEffect in ReportScreen to kick in and it will call Report.navigateToConciergeChat(). This is where we get a second report.

Moving the Onyx.clear() to beforeEach fixes the issue

@ShridharGoel
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks, this wasn't happening earlier - looks like some flow changed in the past few days.

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Jun 4, 2024

@ShridharGoel Can you please fix the lint errors

@s77rt
Copy link
Contributor

s77rt commented Jun 5, 2024

Prettier and conflicts ^

@ShridharGoel
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated.

@ShridharGoel
Copy link
Contributor Author

@marcaaron Can you check this?

@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor

Yes sorry, I have been OOO. Looking now.

Copy link
Contributor

@marcaaron marcaaron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM thanks for the discussion and changes.

@marcaaron
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry this PR broke some workflows on main. Please raise a new PR and merge main into the branch. Thanks!

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 1.4.86-0 🚀

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

1 similar comment
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 1.4.86-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 1.4.86-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/AndrewGable in version: 9.0.0-9 🚀

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants