Fix velocity regression & bug

[wcandillon]

I've made a small type change so that the original bug and current regression would have been caught by TypeScript (TouchInfo | undefined).

I also added a test case that outlines a bug which when fixed, make the velocity finally feel natural.

fixes #800

[wcandillon]

@chrfalch I added a failing test case that may be a bug: onActive is called an extra time when onEnd. Fixing it seem to make it obvious that now the values are correct, the behaviour feels much more natural.

[wcandillon]

I can remove the extra onActive call but then can we add tests for potential regressions this may cause?
Do we call onActive before onEnd for tap touches?

[chrfalch]

I can remove the extra onActive call but then can we add tests for potential regressions this may cause?
Do we call onActive before onEnd for tap touches?

The reason for the extra onActive is that we're trying to ensure that at least one onActive call is emitted - if you tap you could end up with only start/end.

But if this is not a valid use case and there are issues with the extra onActive (velocity?), I'm find with removing it.

[chrfalch]

Awesome cleanup 🙏

[wcandillon]

On gesture handler only onEnd is invoked, for instance: https://github.com/wcandillon/can-it-be-done-in-react-native/blob/ed6211f1b93f4502722e9d209df861f1549c895f/reanimated-2/src/PizzaChallenge/components/IngredientSelection.tsx#L59.

If this is the use reason of the extra call, I would be in favor of removing it. We should add more unit test for the touch handler.

[chrfalch]

On gesture handler only onEnd is invoked, for instance: https://github.com/wcandillon/can-it-be-done-in-react-native/blob/ed6211f1b93f4502722e9d209df861f1549c895f/reanimated-2/src/PizzaChallenge/components/IngredientSelection.tsx#L59.

If this is the use reason of the extra call, I would be in favor of removing it. We should add more unit test for the touch handler.

The use case is to ensure at least one onActive call - but I agree that it isn't necessary super valid so we can remove. Go from me!

[wcandillon]

@chrfalch this is ready for review.

[chrfalch]

Do we have a specific reason for upgrading Jest here?

[wcandillon]

This is so we can mark tests as expected failures.