Refactor Edit and Delete Report Comment

[PauloGasparSv]

Details

Update the api calls to the new UpdateComment and DeleteComment api commands. Also implement the Optimistic with Feedback pattern B to these api calls.

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/211601

Tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Review Checklist

Contributor (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 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 included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • iOS / native
  • Android / native
  • iOS / Safari
  • Android / Chrome
  • MacOS / Chrome
  • 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by tagging the marketing team 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
• 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 */
  • Any functional components have the displayName property
  • 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
• 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(themeColors.componentBG)
• 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.

PR Reviewer Checklist

• 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 verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
  • iOS / native
  • Android / native
  • iOS / Safari
  • Android / Chrome
  • MacOS / Chrome
  • 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 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 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 was added in all src/languages/* files
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is correct English and approved by marketing by tagging the marketing team 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 verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• 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 */
  • Any functional components have the displayName property
  • 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 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(themeColors.componentBG)
• 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.

Test Steps

Run QA steps first then the following:

Test edit comment error

Note: Simulate failure by throwing a test message instead of allowing the edit

1. Log into NewDot
2. Add a comment to a report
3. Simulate a failure by throwing a test message like, for example here like so:
   throw new ExpException("Could not update message!", 400);
4. Edit the comment that was created
5. Verify the edited comment reverts back to the previous message with an error message
6. Dismiss the error message
7. Verify the error message disappears

Test delete comment error

1. Log into NewDot
2. Add a comment to a report
3. Simulate a failure by throwing a test message like, for example here like so:
   throw new ExpException("Could not delete message!", 400);
4. Delete the comment that was created
5. Verify the delete comment reverts back to the previous message (undeleted) with an error message
6. Dismiss the error message
7. Verify the error message disappears

QA Steps

Test greyed editing comment

1. Log into NewDot
2. Add a comment to a report
3. Go offline
4. Edit the comment that was created
5. Verify the edited comment appears greyed out
6. Go online
7. Verify the edited comment is not greyed out anymore and succeeds

Test strike-through deleted comment

1. Log into NewDot
2. Add a comment to a report
3. Go offline
4. Delete the comment
5. Verify the deleted comment appears with a strike-through
6. Verify you no longer have the option to edit or delete the comment
7. Go online
8. Verify the deleted comment disappears

Test greyed deleted Attachment Comment

1. Log into NewDot
2. Add an attachment to a report
3. Go offline
4. Delete the commented attachment
5. Verify the deleted comment appears greyed
6. Verify you no longer have the option to edit or delete the comment
7. Go online
8. Verify the deleted comment disappears

Test editing the latest message

1. Log into NewDot
2. Add a comment to a report
3. Edit the comment that was created
4. Verify the last message text in the Chat list preview (sidebar on the left) shows the edited message

Test deleting the latest message

1. Log into NewDot
2. Add two comments to a report
3. Delete the very last comment that was created but keep the first one
4. Verify the last message text in the Chat list preview (sidebar on the left) updates to the only existing message in the chat

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Screenshots

Web

Mobile Web

Desktop

iOS

Android

[melvin-bot]

Looks like you modified deprecatedAPI.js! To be clear, you should not be adding any code to this file.

Instead, all new API commands should use API.js, and follow our guidelines for writing new API commands.

Unsure if your change is okay? Drop a note in #expensify-open-source!

Added some commits so dismissing my review here.

[melvin-bot]

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

[OSBotify]

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

[Gonals]

Sitting here with @marcaaron. This was good to go!

[PauloGasparSv]

Thanks @Gonals @marcaaron!!!

[PauloGasparSv]

Updated the last 2 QA tests I've added for checking the lastMessageText to match the latest changes (before it was checking while offline, updated to checking it only when online)

[marcaaron]

@PauloGasparSv Why? Those are the QA steps if they are failing QA let them fail...

[PauloGasparSv]

Because the changes in one your latest commits changed a bit the way the lastMessageText is updated @marcaaron! Weren't the changes intentional?

[marcaaron]

Let's put them back in and create follow up issues if we need to and they do not pass QA? I doubt they are blockers for the deploy but maybe polish steps.

[PauloGasparSv]

Let's put them back in and create follow up issues if we need to and they do not pass QA? I doubt they are blockers for the deploy but maybe polish steps.

Oh but I didn't remove them, just changed 2 lines of the test steps because this logic was removed. Changed both "Test editing the latest message" and "Test deleting the latest message" to be tested without toggling the app to offline because now the API is the on responsible for updating that.

Doesn't make sense to me to have tests that will knowingly and intentionally fail in QA. If that's the plan, why did we remove that logic in this P.R. and not in a follow up?

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by @Gonals in version: 1.1.96-0 🚀

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