fix: ensure new code lists are added on the cache from onUpdateOptionListMutation

[standeren]

Description

Ensure new code lists are added on the cache from onUpdateOptionListMutation.

This change will make new created code lists in the content library be visible immediately.

Related Issue(s)

Issue was introduced in this PR: #14269 And discovered in this PR: #14273

Verification

• Your code builds clean without any errors or warnings
• Manual testing done (required)
• Relevant automated test added (if you find this hard, leave it and we'll help out)

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Refactor

  • Updated naming conventions for option list-related variables and functions
  • Improved code modularity by introducing new helper functions for options list management
  • Enhanced clarity in mutation handling and data update processes

• Tests

  • Updated test cases to reflect new variable names and maintain consistency
  • Adjusted test descriptions and expectations for options list operations

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 95.65%. Comparing base (84d7de7) to head (9ef0413).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main   #14365   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   95.65%   95.65%           
=======================================
  Files        1877     1877           
  Lines       24385    24395   +10     
  Branches     2804     2805    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits        23325    23335   +10     
  Misses        799      799           
  Partials      261      261           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[Konrad-Simso]

Nice work! 🚀

I have 1 suggestion, can we decide on using 1 naming convention for options?
We are currently using a mix of option and options for lists and IDs, I suggest we stick to using options.

[standeren]

Nice work! 🚀

I have 1 suggestion, can we decide on using 1 naming convention for options? We are currently using a mix of option and options for lists and IDs, I suggest we stick to using options.

Agree. But I think that must be fixed over the whole solution? 🤔
I can fix it in this PR so it is consistent here at least, tho!

[Konrad-Simso]

Looks good 💯

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request involves renaming variables and updating function signatures in the useUpdateOptionListMutation files. The changes focus on improving naming consistency by modifying variable names from singular to plural form (e.g., optionListId to optionsListId). The modifications include updates to test files and the main mutation logic, introducing new helper functions to improve code modularity and clarity in handling options lists data.

Changes

File	Change Summary
frontend/packages/shared/src/hooks/mutations/useUpdateOptionListMutation.test.ts	- Renamed optionListId to optionsListId in test variables and args - Updated test descriptions to use plural "options list"
frontend/packages/shared/src/hooks/mutations/useUpdateOptionListMutation.ts	- Renamed function updateListInOptionListsData to updateListInOptionsListsData - Added new helper functions: getOldOptionsListData, updateExistingOptionsList, addNewOptionsList - Updated parameter names to use plural form

Suggested Labels

area/ui-editor

Finishing Touches

• 📝 Generate Docstrings (Beta)

---

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[ErlingHauan]

Works nicely! But I noticed that a refresh will sort the overview, and adding a new code list does not. Could you add sorting when adding the new code list, so that the overview remains consistent?

add-new-codelist.mp4

[standeren]

Works nicely! But I noticed that a refresh will sort the overview, and adding a new code list does not. Could you add sorting when adding the new code list, so that the overview remains consistent?

add-new-codelist.mp4

This is actually done by intention. The idea was that if an app have a lot of code lists it might be frustrating that the one you just added is not visible after creation. The assumption comes from complaints on a similar behavior in the text-editor where we sorted newly added texts and the users struggled with finding it in the list after addition. These cases are of course not identical, so not sure it would be a problem 🤷

[ErlingHauan]

Works nicely! But I noticed that a refresh will sort the overview, and adding a new code list does not. Could you add sorting when adding the new code list, so that the overview remains consistent?
add-new-codelist.mp4

This is actually done by intention. The idea was that if an app have a lot of code lists it might be frustrating that the one you just added is not visible after creation. The assumption comes from complaints on a similar behavior in the text-editor where we sorted newly added texts and the users struggled with finding it in the list after addition. These cases are of course not identical, so not sure it would be a problem 🤷

Good point! Lets keep it as is ☺️

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

frontend/packages/shared/src/hooks/mutations/useUpdateOptionListMutation.test.ts (1)

22-47: Consider adding error case tests

While the happy path is well tested, consider adding tests for error cases such as:

• Network failures
• Invalid option list data
• Cache update failures

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3a9233c and 9ef0413.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• frontend/packages/shared/src/hooks/mutations/useUpdateOptionListMutation.test.ts (1 hunks)
• frontend/packages/shared/src/hooks/mutations/useUpdateOptionListMutation.ts (2 hunks)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (4)

• GitHub Check: Build environment and run e2e test
• GitHub Check: Typechecking and linting
• GitHub Check: Testing
• GitHub Check: CodeQL

🔇 Additional comments (6)

frontend/packages/shared/src/hooks/mutations/useUpdateOptionListMutation.ts (4)

26-38: LGTM! Cache handling looks good

The onSuccess callback correctly handles both updating existing lists and invalidating the cache. The naming is now consistent with the plural form used elsewhere.

---

45-56: Well-structured code with good separation of concerns

The function effectively handles both cases (existing and new lists) with clear logic flow and good modularity.

---

83-88: LGTM! Intentional UX decision for immediate visibility

The implementation uses prepend to make new items immediately visible at the top, which aligns with the stated UX goals from the PR discussion.

---

58-66: Consider using a dedicated ID field instead of title

Using title as an identifier could be problematic as titles are not guaranteed to be unique and might change. Consider using a dedicated ID field for matching options lists.

Let's check if there are any other places in the codebase where we might face similar issues:

frontend/packages/shared/src/hooks/mutations/useUpdateOptionListMutation.test.ts (2)

13-17: LGTM! Consistent naming in test setup

The test data setup properly reflects the naming changes made in the main implementation.

---

49-77: LGTM! Comprehensive test coverage for new functionality

The tests effectively verify both the addition of new lists and the correct ordering (prepend behavior) in the cache.