fix: Dismissing the error for corrupted PDF scan request does not delete the expense by nkdengineer · Pull Request #43346 · Expensify/App

nkdengineer · 2024-06-10T08:28:55Z

Details

Fixed Issues

$ #42120
PROPOSAL: #42120 (comment)

Tests

Submit a manual expense
Click QAB
Choose Quick Action
Click Scan
Select a corrupted PDF
Tap on the preview, verify the error "The receipt didn't upload. Download the file or dismiss this error and lose it." is displayed
Dismiss the error
Verify that: The expense should be deleted

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Submit a manual expense
Click QAB
Choose Quick Action
Click Scan
Select a corrupted PDF
Tap on the preview, verify the error "The receipt didn't upload. Download the file or dismiss this error and lose it." is displayed
Dismiss the error
Verify that: The expense should be deleted- [x] Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

android.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

android-mweb.mov

iOS: Native

ios.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios-mweb.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

desktop.mov

MacOS: Desktop

web.mov

…ete the expense

melvin-bot · 2024-06-17T07:56:20Z

@eh2077 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]

eh2077 · 2024-06-18T14:38:27Z

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

0-android.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

0-mobile-chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

0-ios.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

0-ios.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

0-web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

0-desktop.mp4

eh2077

Tested well. Just comments about Default value for inexistent IDs

eh2077 · 2024-06-20T13:45:22Z

@nkdengineer Gentle bump in case you missed this one. Please take a look at comments^

nkdengineer · 2024-06-21T02:36:34Z

@eh2077 i'll update today

Co-authored-by: Eric Han <117511920+eh2077@users.noreply.github.com>

aldo-expensify · 2024-06-21T03:57:20Z

+    const deleteTransaction = useCallback(() => {
+        if (!parentReportAction) {
+            return;
+        }
+        const iouTransactionID = parentReportAction.actionName === CONST.REPORT.ACTIONS.TYPE.IOU ? parentReportAction.originalMessage?.IOUTransactionID ?? '-1' : '-1';
+        if (ReportActionsUtils.isTrackExpenseAction(parentReportAction)) {
+            IOU.deleteTrackExpense(parentReport?.reportID ?? '-1', iouTransactionID, parentReportAction, true);
+            return;
+        }
+        IOU.deleteMoneyRequest(iouTransactionID, parentReportAction, true);
+    }, [parentReport?.reportID, parentReportAction]);


I think there is no point in using useCallback here since you are not passing down this function to another component and you are not using it in another function wrapped in useCallback.

Can you instead define this function outside of the component and receive as parameters parentReport and parentReportAction 🙏 ?

Then later you call it with deleteTransaction(parentReport, parentReportAction)

@aldo-expensify please check again

aldo-expensify

Thanks for doing the changes @nkdengineer 🙇

OSBotify · 2024-06-21T17:23:46Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

OSBotify · 2024-06-21T21:43:19Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/aldo-expensify in version: 9.0.1-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-06-25T19:43:56Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/yuwenmemon in version: 9.0.1-19 🚀

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

fix: Dismissing the error for corrupted PDF scan request does not del…

6d04a90

…ete the expense

eh2077 mentioned this pull request Jun 11, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-07-26] [HOLD for payment 2024-07-10] [HOLD for payment 2024-07-02] IOU - Dismissing the error for corrupted PDF scan request does not delete the expense #42120

Closed

6 tasks

Merge branch 'main' into fix/42120

2f645fb

nkdengineer marked this pull request as ready for review June 17, 2024 07:56

nkdengineer requested a review from a team as a code owner June 17, 2024 07:56

melvin-bot Bot requested review from eh2077 and removed request for a team June 17, 2024 07:56

eh2077 reviewed Jun 19, 2024

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.tsx Outdated

Comment thread src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.tsx Outdated

nkdengineer and others added 2 commits June 21, 2024 09:52

Update src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.tsx

8a2df50

Co-authored-by: Eric Han <117511920+eh2077@users.noreply.github.com>

Update src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.tsx

2866a96

Co-authored-by: Eric Han <117511920+eh2077@users.noreply.github.com>

eh2077 approved these changes Jun 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from aldo-expensify June 21, 2024 03:30

aldo-expensify requested changes Jun 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

nkdengineer added 4 commits June 21, 2024 16:03

Merge branch 'main' into fix/42120

76a247a

fix: delete useCallBack in deleteTransaction

f4b30e9

Merge branch 'main' into fix/42120

fdc25d6

fix typecheck

3d724a6

aldo-expensify approved these changes Jun 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

aldo-expensify merged commit c3b8629 into Expensify:main Jun 21, 2024

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request Jun 21, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-06-21 #44186

Closed

bernhardoj mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-07-10] [HOLD for payment 2024-07-02] [$250] Scan - Existing expense is removed when dismissing receipt error #44246

Closed

6 tasks

bernhardoj mentioned this pull request Aug 1, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-10-14] [$250] Expense - Main chat with RBR is not removed after dismissing error from expense report #46662

Closed

6 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix: Dismissing the error for corrupted PDF scan request does not delete the expense#43346

fix: Dismissing the error for corrupted PDF scan request does not delete the expense#43346
aldo-expensify merged 8 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
nkdengineer:fix/42120

nkdengineer commented Jun 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 17, 2024

Uh oh!

eh2077 commented Jun 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

eh2077 left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

eh2077 commented Jun 20, 2024

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Jun 21, 2024

Uh oh!

aldo-expensify Jun 21, 2024

Uh oh!

nkdengineer Jun 21, 2024

Uh oh!

aldo-expensify left a comment

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 21, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 21, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 25, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Conversation

nkdengineer commented Jun 10, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 17, 2024

Uh oh!

eh2077 commented Jun 18, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

eh2077 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

eh2077 commented Jun 20, 2024

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Jun 21, 2024

Uh oh!

aldo-expensify Jun 21, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nkdengineer Jun 21, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aldo-expensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 21, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 21, 2024

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jun 25, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

nkdengineer commented Jun 10, 2024 •

edited

Loading

eh2077 commented Jun 18, 2024 •

edited

Loading