fix error message disappear #35871

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-06T05:00:44Z

Details

This PR will fix the issue: Scan - Merchant message disappears after deleting receipt and reappears after adding receipt

Fixed Issues

$ #34997
PROPOSAL: #34997 (comment)

Tests

Go to workspace chat
Create a scan request
While the scanning is ongoing, navigate to the request details page and manually enter amount
Click on the receipt and delete it
Verify that the error and RBR stay at the 'Merchant' field
Add a receipt
Verify that the error and RBR stay at the 'Merchant' field

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Go to workspace chat
Create a scan request
While the scanning is ongoing, navigate to the request details page and manually enter amount
Click on the receipt and delete it
Verify that the error and RBR stay at the 'Merchant' field
Add a receipt
Verify that the error and RBR stay at the 'Merchant' field

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screencast.from.07-02-2024.18.05.28.webm

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screencast.from.06-02-2024.11.59.58.webm

iOS: Native

Screencast.from.06-02-2024.13.29.55.webm

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screencast.from.06-02-2024.11.57.55.webm

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screencast.from.06-02-2024.11.45.05.webm

MacOS: Desktop

Screencast.from.06-02-2024.13.24.32.webm

melvin-bot · 2024-02-06T05:00:49Z

@c3024 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]

c3024 · 2024-02-06T13:30:55Z

Please merge main. Typechecks are fixed on it.

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-06T14:44:33Z

@c3024 I updated.

c3024 · 2024-02-08T09:34:02Z

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 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(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 form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label 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

receiptErrorAndroid.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

receiptErrorAndroidChrome.mp4

iOS: Native

receiptErroriOS.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

receiptErroriOSSafari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

scanRequest.mp4

manualRequest.mp4

distanceRequest.mp4

manualRequestOneToOne.mp4

scanRequestOneToOne.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

receiptErrorDesktop.mp4

c3024 · 2024-02-08T10:49:29Z

I think RBR on LHN as well should be fixed within this issue.

fixError.mp4

@dukenv0307 @Julesssss

Julesssss · 2024-02-08T11:56:26Z

I think RBR on LHN as well should be fixed within this issue.

Ah, so that occurs with this PR, but not on main? If so I agree.

c3024 · 2024-02-09T07:33:02Z

No this PR did not introduce it. The behaviour is already there are on main.

c3024 · 2024-02-13T14:08:16Z

No, this PR did not introduce it. The behaviour is already there are on main.

When there is an error shown at a mandatory field, I think it is logical to show RBR on LHN as well. That's why I asked if showing RBR on LHN should be included within the scope of this issue. This PR did not change any behaviour that already existed on main w.r.t. LHN.

@Julesssss

Julesssss · 2024-02-13T15:06:12Z

When there is an error shown at a mandatory field, I think it is logical to show RBR on LHN as well. That's why I asked if showing RBR on LHN should be included within the scope of this issue

Okay got it.

@dukenv0307 could you please apply a change to your PR to ensure the error is shown on the LHN?

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-15T07:48:36Z

I am working on it

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-15T11:46:40Z

@c3024 I fixed comment #35871 (comment)

c3024 · 2024-02-15T12:17:47Z

I think once a request is deemed as a scan request, even if we remove the receipt, the error at the merchant field and RBRs on LHN should be same as when there was a receipt.

receiptError.mp4

Here, on member and admin side together there are total three red dots and zero green dots when there is a receipt. When the receipt is removed, IMO there should be the same dots as earlier. But there is one red dot and one green dot. @dukenv0307

cc: @Julesssss

Christinadobrzyn · 2024-02-16T17:26:53Z

Hi there, can you check to see if this issue might be a regression from this PR?

c3024 · 2024-02-16T17:36:08Z

This PR hasn't been merged yet @Christinadobrzyn . That deploy blocker must be related to another issue.

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-20T03:15:09Z

Daily update: Still working on the LHN RBR issues

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-20T09:48:18Z

@c3024 The reason that leads to the behavior mentioned in this [comment] (#35871 (comment)) is that the condition here return false. So, to fix it, my plan is to remove all the hasReceipt functions that will be used in ReportUtils.hasSmartscanError . Below is the detail:

First, update:

App/src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Lines 2243 to 2246 in 0f372c2

    
           function hasMissingSmartscanFields(iouReportID: string): boolean { 
        
               const transactionsWithReceipts = getTransactionsWithReceipts(iouReportID); 
        
               return transactionsWithReceipts.some((transaction) => TransactionUtils.hasMissingSmartscanFields(transaction)); 
        
           }

to:

function hasMissingSmartscanFields(iouReportID: string): boolean {
    return TransactionUtils.getAllReportTransactions(iouReportID).some((transaction) => TransactionUtils.hasMissingSmartscanFields(transaction));
}

Then, update:

App/src/libs/TransactionUtils.ts

Lines 446 to 448 in 0f372c2

    
           function hasMissingSmartscanFields(transaction: OnyxEntry<Transaction>): boolean { 
        
               return Boolean(transaction && hasReceipt(transaction) && !isDistanceRequest(transaction) && !isReceiptBeingScanned(transaction) && areRequiredFieldsEmpty(transaction)); 
        
           }

to:

function hasMissingSmartscanFields(transaction: OnyxEntry<Transaction>): boolean {
    return Boolean(transaction && !isDistanceRequest(transaction) && !isReceiptBeingScanned(transaction) && areRequiredFieldsEmpty(transaction));
}

I tested and it works well. Do you have any feedback about this solution?

c3024 · 2024-02-22T07:10:21Z

Those changes work well. Please include them in the PR. @dukenv0307

c3024 · 2024-02-22T07:13:46Z

Please merge main as well because we need these changes included in this PR #36810 also to test correctly. @dukenv0307

…ter-deleting-receipt

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-22T07:31:55Z

Those changes work well. Please include them in the PR. @dukenv0307

@c3024 I updated and merged main.

Julesssss · 2024-02-22T10:47:46Z

Seems like we're nearly there 👍

c3024 · 2024-02-22T12:39:12Z

src/libs/TransactionUtils.ts

+/**
+ * Check if the transaction has missing required fields
+ */
+function hasMissingRequiredFields(transaction: OnyxEntry<Transaction>): boolean {


I think it is better to just use hasMissingSmartScanFields at the places where we added hasMissingRequiredFields even though the name hasMissingSmartScanFields might be a little misleading for other requests like manual requests with receipts.

Adding another function with a different name like this hasMissingRequiredFields that returns the same value as hasMissingSmartScanFields can be more confusing later IMO. @dukenv0307

cc: @Julesssss

I'm on the fence. Having a better-described function name is good. But we can always do that later, or rename the existing function. @dukenv0307 is the idea that we'll eventually add to these functions to separate them?

Adding another function with a different name like this hasMissingRequiredFields that returns the same value as hasMissingSmartScanFields can be more confusing later

I agree with @c3024 comment. Just updated the PR to only use hasMissingSmartScanFields

c3024 · 2024-02-23T12:36:39Z

RBR on ReportPreview disappears when we remove the receipt.

I think we gotta modify ReportPreview as well here.

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/ReportPreview.tsx

Line 141 in cd14830

    
           const hasErrors = (hasReceipts && hasMissingSmartscanFields) || (canUseViolations && ReportUtils.hasViolations(iouReportID, transactionViolations));

reportPreviewRedDot.mp4

@dukenv0307

dukenv0307 · 2024-02-26T01:33:31Z

@c3024 I fixed your comment. The solution is to remove the hasReceipt in:

App/src/components/ReportActionItem/ReportPreview.tsx

Line 141 in 89d5689

    
           const hasErrors = (hasReceipts && hasMissingSmartscanFields) || (canUseViolations && ReportUtils.hasViolations(iouReportID, transactionViolations));

Video:

Screencast.from.26-02-2024.08.38.34.webm

c3024 · 2024-02-27T11:49:59Z

@dukenv0307 In the test steps, please add a step between 4 and 5 as something like

Verify that the error and RBR stay at the 'Merchant' field

and after 'Add a receipt' step as same

Verify that the error and RBR stay at the 'Merchant' field

c3024

LGTM

OSBotify · 2024-02-27T12:04:21Z

✋ 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 · 2024-02-29T00:06:43Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 1.4.45-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-02-29T23:31:11Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 1.4.45-6 🚀

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

fix error message disappear

caa025b

dukenv0307 requested a review from a team as a code owner February 6, 2024 05:00

melvin-bot bot requested review from c3024 and removed request for a team February 6, 2024 05:00

fix lint

1ca7374

dukenv0307 mentioned this pull request Feb 6, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-03-07] [$500] [MEDIUM] Scan - Merchant message disappears after deleting receipt and reappears after adding receipt #34997

Closed

6 tasks

merge main

38bdeb3

fix error message in LHN

bee6bd1

dukenv0307 added 2 commits February 15, 2024 18:48

fix merge main

14fb7ca

fix remove redundant boolean

6215e76

dukenv0307 added 2 commits February 22, 2024 14:24

Merge branch 'main' into fix/34997-scan-merchant-message-disappear-af…

59542b2

…ter-deleting-receipt

update hasMissingSmartscanFields function

7c21c94

c3024 reviewed Feb 22, 2024

View reviewed changes

dukenv0307 added 2 commits February 23, 2024 13:38

fix replace hasMissingRequiredFields by hasMissingSmartscanFields

631d206

fix remove hasMissingRequiredFields

9dcca6a

fix missing RBR in report preview

dfaeb66

c3024 approved these changes Feb 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from Julesssss February 27, 2024 11:53

Julesssss approved these changes Feb 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

Julesssss merged commit cfa0ae3 into Expensify:main Feb 27, 2024
16 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 28, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-02-28 #37459

Closed

91 tasks

s77rt mentioned this pull request Mar 4, 2024

[$500] Tag - "Missing tag" error appears & disappears when change Category on created request #37644

Closed

6 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix error message disappear #35871

fix error message disappear #35871

dukenv0307 commented Feb 6, 2024 •

edited

Loading

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 6, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 6, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 6, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 commented Feb 8, 2024

Julesssss commented Feb 8, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 9, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 13, 2024

Julesssss commented Feb 13, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 15, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 15, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 15, 2024

Christinadobrzyn commented Feb 16, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 16, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

dukenv0307 commented Feb 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 commented Feb 22, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 22, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 22, 2024

Julesssss commented Feb 22, 2024

c3024 Feb 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Julesssss Feb 22, 2024

dukenv0307 Feb 23, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 23, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 commented Feb 27, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 left a comment

OSBotify commented Feb 27, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 29, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 29, 2024

fix error message disappear #35871

fix error message disappear #35871

Conversation

dukenv0307 commented Feb 6, 2024 • edited Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 6, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 6, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 6, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 8, 2024 • edited Loading

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

c3024 commented Feb 8, 2024

Julesssss commented Feb 8, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 9, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 13, 2024

Julesssss commented Feb 13, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 15, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 15, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 15, 2024

Christinadobrzyn commented Feb 16, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 16, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 20, 2024 • edited Loading

dukenv0307 commented Feb 20, 2024 • edited Loading

c3024 commented Feb 22, 2024

c3024 commented Feb 22, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 22, 2024

Julesssss commented Feb 22, 2024

c3024 Feb 22, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Julesssss Feb 22, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dukenv0307 Feb 23, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

c3024 commented Feb 23, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 26, 2024 • edited Loading

c3024 commented Feb 27, 2024 • edited Loading

c3024 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Feb 27, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 29, 2024

OSBotify commented Feb 29, 2024

dukenv0307 commented Feb 6, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 commented Feb 8, 2024 •

edited

Loading

dukenv0307 commented Feb 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

dukenv0307 commented Feb 20, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 Feb 22, 2024 •

edited

Loading

dukenv0307 commented Feb 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

c3024 commented Feb 27, 2024 •

edited

Loading