[NoQA] Tests for group chat name by ShridharGoel · Pull Request #40658 · Expensify/App

ShridharGoel · 2024-04-21T12:41:45Z

Details

Tests for group chat name.

Fixed Issues

$ #40189
PROPOSAL: #40189 (comment)

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: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb 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 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
  - 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 grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- 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 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 UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2024-04-21T12:41:49Z

@s77rt 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]

s77rt

Fix ts errors
Add unit test for the following case:
- getGroupChatName called with report id only and that report does not have a name

s77rt · 2024-04-22T21:04:59Z

tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx

+jest.mock('../../src/libs/Notification/LocalNotification');
+jest.mock('../../src/components/Icon/Expensicons');


Suggested change

jest.mock('../../src/libs/Notification/LocalNotification');

jest.mock('../../src/components/Icon/Expensicons');

Not needed

s77rt · 2024-04-22T21:07:31Z

tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx

+    // Connect to Pusher
+    PusherConnectionManager.init();
+    Pusher.init({
+        appKey: CONFIG.PUSHER.APP_KEY,
+        cluster: CONFIG.PUSHER.CLUSTER,
+        authEndpoint: `${CONFIG.EXPENSIFY.DEFAULT_API_ROOT}api/AuthenticatePusher?`,
+    });


Suggested change

// Connect to Pusher

PusherConnectionManager.init();

Pusher.init({

appKey: CONFIG.PUSHER.APP_KEY,

cluster: CONFIG.PUSHER.CLUSTER,

authEndpoint: `${CONFIG.EXPENSIFY.DEFAULT_API_ROOT}api/AuthenticatePusher?`,

});

Not needed

s77rt · 2024-04-22T21:16:39Z

tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx

+let reportActionCreatedDate: string;
+let reportAction2CreatedDate: string;


Suggested change

let reportActionCreatedDate: string;

let reportAction2CreatedDate: string;

We don't need report actions

s77rt · 2024-05-01T23:27:09Z

Any updates on this?

ShridharGoel · 2024-05-02T10:16:25Z

Will update this by tomorrow.

s77rt · 2024-05-06T20:42:05Z

tests/utils/LHNTestUtils.tsx

+    participantAccountIDs.forEach((id) => {
+        participants[id] = {
+            hidden: false,
+            role: id === 1 ? 'admin' : 'member',


Do we need to set the role here?

There should be at least one admin, so it seems good to have the role set.

This would affect other tests that uses this util function. Add the admin participant if needed only on the group test file

s77rt · 2024-05-08T19:14:12Z

tests/utils/LHNTestUtils.tsx

+function getFakeReport(participantAccountIDs = [1, 2], millisecondsInThePast = 0, isUnread = false, shouldAddParticipantRole: boolean = false): Report {
    const lastVisibleActionCreated = DateUtils.getDBTime(Date.now() - millisecondsInThePast);

+    const participants: Record<number, Participant> = {};


Suggested change

const participants: Record<number, Participant> = {};

const participants: Participants = {};

NAB

s77rt · 2024-05-08T19:20:38Z

tests/utils/LHNTestUtils.tsx

+    participantAccountIDs.forEach((id) => {
+        participants[id] = {
+            hidden: false,
+            role: shouldAddParticipantRole ? (id === 1 ? 'admin' : 'member') : null,


This is still not valid for a util function. Not all participants are expected to have the admin using account id 1. Instead of shouldAddParticipantRole use a param that's an array and tells us the account ids of the admins.

s77rt · 2024-05-11T12:29:29Z

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 either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- 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 UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

marcaaron

Tests look nice and thorough! Thanks! Spotted an improvement.

marcaaron · 2024-05-13T19:26:35Z

tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx

+    ...jest.requireActual<typeof Animated>('react-native-reanimated/mock'),
+    createAnimatedPropAdapter: jest.fn,
+    useReducedMotion: jest.fn,
+}));


App/tests/README.md

Lines 48 to 50 in 957b5ec

## Mocking `node_modules`, user modules, and what belongs in `jest/setup.ts`

If you need to mock a library that exists in `node_modules` then add it to the `__mocks__` folder in the root of the project. More information about this [here](https://jestjs.io/docs/manual-mocks#mocking-node-modules). If you need to mock an individual library you should create a mock module in a `__mocks__` subdirectory adjacent to the library as explained [here](https://jestjs.io/docs/manual-mocks#mocking-user-modules). However, keep in mind that when you do this you also must manually require the mock by calling something like `jest.mock('../../src/libs/Log');` at the top of an individual test file. If every test in the app will need something to be mocked that's a good case for adding it to `jest/setup.ts`, but we should generally avoid adding user mocks or `node_modules` mocks to this file. Please use the `__mocks__` subdirectories wherever appropriate.

Can any of these be moved into __mocks__ or no?

Can you help with this? I couldn't get how we can include these in __mocks__.

What have you tried?

@marcaaron I don't think these could be added to __mocks__.

Ok that's fine, but can we please add some explanation about why?

Using __mocks__ for @react-native-reanimated.

For LogBox, I tried the below but it didn't work:

const mock = { /* eslint-disable-next-line @typescript-eslint/naming-convention */ __esModule: true, default: { ignoreLogs: jest.fn(), ignoreAllLogs: jest.fn(), }, }; export default mock;

In @react-navigation/native, it seems we can't move to __mocks__ because transitionEndCB is needed in the test file.

tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx

s77rt · 2024-05-16T19:17:53Z

@ShridharGoel Can you please address the review comments above and resolve the conflicts

marcaaron · 2024-05-29T18:50:20Z

What's the latest here?

ShridharGoel · 2024-06-04T12:55:45Z

Any idea what can be causing this? All tests are passing when trying one by one locally.

Tests for group chat name › Should show only 5 names when there are 8 participants in the report header

    expect(received).toHaveLength(expected)

    Expected length: 1
    Received length: 2
    Received array:  [{"_fiber": [FiberNode]}, {"_fiber": [FiberNode]}]

      284 |                 const optionRowsHintText = Localize.translateLocal('accessibilityHints.navigatesToChat');
      285 |                 const optionRows = screen.queryAllByAccessibilityHint(optionRowsHintText);
    > 286 |                 expect(optionRows).toHaveLength(1);
          |                                    ^
      287 |
      288 |                 const displayNameHintText = Localize.translateLocal('accessibilityHints.chatUserDisplayNames');
      289 |                 const displayNameText = screen.queryByLabelText(displayNameHintText);

      at toHaveLength (tests/ui/GroupChatNameTests.tsx:286:36)

s77rt · 2024-06-04T16:32:24Z

After running test A and navigating to the report, we will go into the afterEach phase in which we clear onyx data. At this point the report is still focused and the report getting removed causes the useEffect in ReportScreen to kick in and it will call Report.navigateToConciergeChat(). This is where we get a second report.

Moving the Onyx.clear() to beforeEach fixes the issue

ShridharGoel · 2024-06-04T16:47:25Z

Thanks, this wasn't happening earlier - looks like some flow changed in the past few days.

s77rt · 2024-06-04T19:06:54Z

@ShridharGoel Can you please fix the lint errors

s77rt · 2024-06-05T17:40:05Z

Prettier and conflicts ^

ShridharGoel · 2024-06-07T20:22:38Z

Updated.

ShridharGoel · 2024-06-14T07:39:56Z

@marcaaron Can you check this?

marcaaron · 2024-06-18T19:44:41Z

Yes sorry, I have been OOO. Looking now.

marcaaron

LGTM thanks for the discussion and changes.

marcaaron · 2024-06-18T20:21:28Z

Sorry this PR broke some workflows on main. Please raise a new PR and merge main into the branch. Thanks!

OSBotify · 2024-06-19T21:52:01Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 1.4.86-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-06-19T22:16:43Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 1.4.86-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-06-19T22:50:42Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 1.4.86-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-06-21T21:21:20Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/AndrewGable in version: 9.0.0-9 🚀

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

Tests for group chat name

142c402

ShridharGoel requested a review from a team as a code owner April 21, 2024 12:41

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team April 21, 2024 12:41

melvin-bot bot requested a review from s77rt April 21, 2024 12:41

Update

46c5110

ShridharGoel mentioned this pull request Apr 22, 2024

[HOLD for payment 2024-11-29] [HOLD for payment 2024-06-28] [$250] Add automated tests for getGroupChatName() #40189

Closed

4 tasks

s77rt suggested changes Apr 22, 2024

View reviewed changes

ShridharGoel added 2 commits May 3, 2024 21:01

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/Expensify/App into ui_tests

1fbe53e

Update

70da623

s77rt reviewed May 6, 2024

View reviewed changes

Add admin and member only for group tests

bfe3910

s77rt suggested changes May 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

Update

b49d501

s77rt approved these changes May 11, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from marcaaron May 11, 2024 12:29

marcaaron requested changes May 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

ShridharGoel added 4 commits May 17, 2024 01:26

Updates

dd83c64

Update

ee325bd

Fixes

d22bce2

Fixes

f954655

ShridharGoel added 2 commits June 1, 2024 14:22

Merge

49d808b

Use __mocks__

333eed7

ShridharGoel force-pushed the ui_tests branch from 1b7d6c3 to 333eed7 Compare June 1, 2024 18:56

Update

cdc24cd

ShridharGoel requested review from marcaaron and s77rt June 4, 2024 17:52

ShridharGoel added 2 commits June 5, 2024 17:09

Update

7759247

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/Expensify/App into ui_tests

258aeb5

ShridharGoel added 2 commits June 8, 2024 01:10

Update

e330bd0

Update

5660b25

s77rt approved these changes Jun 8, 2024

View reviewed changes

marcaaron approved these changes Jun 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

marcaaron assigned ShridharGoel Jun 18, 2024

marcaaron merged commit 93b2a74 into Expensify:main Jun 18, 2024

This was referenced Jun 18, 2024

Investigate workflow job failing on main: test / test (job 1) #43954

Closed

Investigate workflow job failing on main: typecheck / typecheck #43955

Closed

Investigate workflow job failing on main: confirmPassingBuild #43956

Closed

marcaaron mentioned this pull request Jun 18, 2024

Revert "[NoQA] Tests for group chat name" #43957

Merged

48 tasks

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jun 19, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-06-19 #44047

Closed

59 tasks

ShridharGoel mentioned this pull request Aug 1, 2024

[NoQA] Tests for group chat name #46661

Merged

48 tasks

		jest.mock('../../src/libs/Notification/LocalNotification');
		jest.mock('../../src/components/Icon/Expensicons');

		let reportActionCreatedDate: string;
		let reportAction2CreatedDate: string;

	const participants: Record<number, Participant> = {};
	const participants: Participants = {};

	## Mocking `node_modules`, user modules, and what belongs in `jest/setup.ts`

	If you need to mock a library that exists in `node_modules` then add it to the `__mocks__` folder in the root of the project. More information about this [here](https://jestjs.io/docs/manual-mocks#mocking-node-modules). If you need to mock an individual library you should create a mock module in a `__mocks__` subdirectory adjacent to the library as explained [here](https://jestjs.io/docs/manual-mocks#mocking-user-modules). However, keep in mind that when you do this you also must manually require the mock by calling something like `jest.mock('../../src/libs/Log');` at the top of an individual test file. If every test in the app will need something to be mocked that's a good case for adding it to `jest/setup.ts`, but we should generally avoid adding user mocks or `node_modules` mocks to this file. Please use the `__mocks__` subdirectories wherever appropriate.

Conversation

ShridharGoel commented Apr 21, 2024

Details

Fixed Issues

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Apr 21, 2024

Uh oh!

s77rt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

s77rt commented May 1, 2024

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel commented May 2, 2024

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

s77rt commented May 11, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

marcaaron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel May 29, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

s77rt commented May 16, 2024

Uh oh!

marcaaron commented May 29, 2024

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel commented Jun 4, 2024

Uh oh!

s77rt commented Jun 4, 2024

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel commented Jun 4, 2024

Uh oh!

s77rt commented Jun 4, 2024

Uh oh!

s77rt commented Jun 5, 2024

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel commented Jun 7, 2024

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel commented Jun 14, 2024

Uh oh!

marcaaron commented Jun 18, 2024

Uh oh!

marcaaron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ShridharGoel May 29, 2024 •

edited

Loading