fix: clear the input when resending validate code #28757

allroundexperts · 2023-10-03T23:31:46Z

Details

This PR resets the magic code field when Resent validate code button is clicked.

Fixed Issues

$ #28553
PROPOSAL: #28553 (comment)

Tests

Open the app and if logged in, logout
Enter any email and continue
Shift focus to any other digit then 1st digit and wait for some time to enable 'Didn't receive a magic code' link
Click on the link and verify that the focus shifts to the first digit.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Open the app and if logged in, logout
Enter any email and continue
Shift focus to any other digit then 1st digit and wait for some time to enable 'Didn't receive a magic code' link
Click on the link and verify that the focus shifts to the first digit.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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 / Chrome
- iOS / native
- iOS / 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 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 correct English and approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review 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
I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
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(themeColors.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 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 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 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 author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web

Screen.Recording.2023-10-04.at.4.13.34.AM.mov

Mobile Web - Chrome

Screen.Recording.2023-10-04.at.4.16.23.AM.mov

Mobile Web - Safari

Screen.Recording.2023-10-04.at.4.16.04.AM.mov

Desktop

Screen.Recording.2023-10-04.at.4.22.32.AM.mov

iOS

Screen.Recording.2023-10-04.at.4.18.41.AM.mov

Android

Screen.Recording.2023-10-04.at.4.18.16.AM.mov

melvin-bot · 2023-10-03T23:31:51Z

@aimane-chnaif 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]

allroundexperts · 2023-10-05T15:45:52Z

@aimane-chnaif What's the update here?

aimane-chnaif · 2023-10-05T15:49:10Z

Have you tried to make common component? Seems like @marcaaron still suggests all inconsistencies should be fixed here, not out of scope.

marcaaron · 2023-10-05T21:21:09Z

fwiw, we don't have to fix every inconsistency. It sounded like there was code we are duplicating. So, I asked if we can think of some way to reuse it. If not, or it is too difficult - then we can proceed.

I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)

marcaaron · 2023-10-05T21:23:22Z

src/pages/signin/ValidateCodeForm/BaseValidateCodeForm.js

@@ -177,6 +177,9 @@ function BaseValidateCodeForm(props) {
     */
    const resendValidateCode = () => {
        User.resendValidateCode(props.credentials.login);
+        setValidateCode('');
+        inputValidateCodeRef.current.clear();
+        inputValidateCodeRef.current.focus();


Why must we clear() here?

But not here:

App/src/pages/settings/Profile/Contacts/ValidateCodeForm/BaseValidateCodeForm.js

Lines 111 to 115 in cec77d2

const resendValidateCode = () => {

User.requestContactMethodValidateCode(props.contactMethod);

setValidateCode('');

inputValidateCodeRef.current.focus();

};

This code can be optimized in both pages.
So inputValidateCodeRef.current.clear(); should be enough. This calls inputValidateCodeRef.current.focus(); and props.onChangeText('') followed by setValidateCode('')

Yes. Seems like my local wasn't updated with the latest main. This got changed later on.

@aimane-chnaif Updated.

allroundexperts · 2023-10-05T21:25:55Z

fwiw, we don't have to fix every inconsistency. It sounded like there was code we are duplicating. So, I asked if we can think of some way to reuse it. If not, or it is too difficult - then we can proceed.

I think the two components can be composed into a single component that works at both places. However, I feel like this task is beyond the scope of this ticket. Without composition, encapsulating just the input clearing logic into a utility function does not make full sense to me. The utility function would require the input ref and the stateChange function as its inputs.

aimane-chnaif

can you test these removals still work fine?

aimane-chnaif · 2023-10-05T22:51:03Z

src/pages/settings/Profile/Contacts/ValidateCodeForm/BaseValidateCodeForm.js

+        inputValidateCodeRef.current.clear();
        setValidateCode('');


Suggested change

inputValidateCodeRef.current.clear();

setValidateCode('');

inputValidateCodeRef.current.clear();

aimane-chnaif · 2023-10-05T22:51:27Z

src/pages/signin/ValidateCodeForm/BaseValidateCodeForm.js

@@ -177,6 +177,8 @@ function BaseValidateCodeForm(props) {
     */
    const resendValidateCode = () => {
        User.resendValidateCode(props.credentials.login);
+        inputValidateCodeRef.current.clear();
+        setValidateCode('');


Suggested change

setValidateCode('');

@aimane-chnaif Seems to be working fine.

Screen.Recording.2023-10-06.at.3.56.02.AM.mov

aimane-chnaif · 2023-10-05T23:29:25Z

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 / Chrome
- iOS / native
- iOS / 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review 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 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(themeColors.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 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

Web

web1.mov

web2.mov

Mobile Web - Chrome

mchrome.mov

Mobile Web - Safari

msafari.mov

Desktop

desktop.mov

iOS

ios1.mov

ios2.mov

Android

android.mov

aimane-chnaif

LGTM
@marcaaron all yours

OSBotify · 2023-10-06T00:14:44Z

✋ 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 · 2023-10-06T08:23:33Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 1.3.79-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2023-10-09T22:32:07Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 1.3.79-5 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2023-10-09T22:41:00Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 1.3.79-5 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2023-10-09T23:16:54Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 1.3.79-5 🚀

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

fix: clear the input when resending validate code

a43f616

allroundexperts requested a review from a team as a code owner October 3, 2023 23:31

melvin-bot bot requested review from aimane-chnaif and removed request for a team October 3, 2023 23:31

allroundexperts mentioned this pull request Oct 3, 2023

[HOLD for payment 2023-10-16] [$500] Log in - App doesn't switches to first digit on click on didn't recieved a magic code click #28553

Closed

6 tasks

marcaaron reviewed Oct 5, 2023

View reviewed changes

fix: handle comment suggestions

a71508d

aimane-chnaif reviewed Oct 5, 2023

View reviewed changes

fix: remove the setValidateCode call while resending the magic code

060bf6d

aimane-chnaif approved these changes Oct 5, 2023

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from marcaaron October 5, 2023 23:30

marcaaron approved these changes Oct 6, 2023

View reviewed changes

marcaaron merged commit a0064a9 into Expensify:main Oct 6, 2023
14 of 15 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Oct 6, 2023

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2023-10-06 #28983

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix: clear the input when resending validate code #28757

fix: clear the input when resending validate code #28757

allroundexperts commented Oct 3, 2023

melvin-bot bot commented Oct 3, 2023

allroundexperts commented Oct 5, 2023

aimane-chnaif commented Oct 5, 2023

marcaaron commented Oct 5, 2023

marcaaron Oct 5, 2023

aimane-chnaif Oct 5, 2023

allroundexperts Oct 5, 2023

allroundexperts Oct 5, 2023

allroundexperts commented Oct 5, 2023

aimane-chnaif left a comment

aimane-chnaif Oct 5, 2023

aimane-chnaif Oct 5, 2023

allroundexperts Oct 5, 2023

aimane-chnaif commented Oct 5, 2023

aimane-chnaif left a comment

OSBotify commented Oct 6, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 6, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 9, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 9, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 9, 2023

	const resendValidateCode = () => {
	User.requestContactMethodValidateCode(props.contactMethod);
	setValidateCode('');
	inputValidateCodeRef.current.focus();
	};

	inputValidateCodeRef.current.clear();
	setValidateCode('');
	inputValidateCodeRef.current.clear();

fix: clear the input when resending validate code #28757

fix: clear the input when resending validate code #28757

Conversation

allroundexperts commented Oct 3, 2023

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Oct 3, 2023

allroundexperts commented Oct 5, 2023

aimane-chnaif commented Oct 5, 2023

marcaaron commented Oct 5, 2023

marcaaron Oct 5, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aimane-chnaif Oct 5, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

allroundexperts Oct 5, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

allroundexperts Oct 5, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

allroundexperts commented Oct 5, 2023

aimane-chnaif left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aimane-chnaif Oct 5, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aimane-chnaif Oct 5, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

allroundexperts Oct 5, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aimane-chnaif commented Oct 5, 2023

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

aimane-chnaif left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Oct 6, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 6, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 9, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 9, 2023

OSBotify commented Oct 9, 2023