create advanced filters has by 289Adam289 · Pull Request #47918 · Expensify/App

289Adam289 · 2024-08-23T13:17:55Z

Details

Adds new type=chat specific filter Has

Fixed Issues

$#47497
PROPOSAL:

Tests

visit route search/filters
Set type in onyx on "chat"
confirm Has filter only appears when type="chat"
use Has filter and other filters that use SearchMultipleSelectionPicker e.g ExpenseType
Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-08-26.at.13.08.42.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2024-08-26.at.13.11.11.mp4

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-08-26.at.13.02.06.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-08-26.at.13.04.06.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

src/languages/es.ts

Kicu

LGTM, suggested only small renames

src/pages/Search/SearchAdvancedFiltersPage/SearchFiltersHasPage.tsx

melvin-bot · 2024-08-26T15:40:18Z

@rayane-djouah 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]

luacmartins

@289Adam289 can you please merge main so we can easily access the filters via the UI?

src/pages/Search/AdvancedSearchFilters.tsx

rayane-d · 2024-08-27T19:12:34Z

src/pages/Search/AdvancedSearchFilters.tsx

+    const shouldShowExpenseSpecificFilter = currentType === CONST.SEARCH.DATA_TYPES.EXPENSE;
+    const shouldShowChatSpecificFilter = currentType === CONST.SEARCH.DATA_TYPES.CHAT;


We need to determine which filters are present for invoice and trip types also

I think we could declare different arrays for each type and then return the values depending on type, similar to what we do here

@luacmartins could you create a short list of type-specific filters and indicate when they should be visible? (e.g., Has is only visible when type=chat). It would be a huge help.

I think this is the correct list. @JmillsExpensify could you please confirm?

Expense
Date, currency, merchant, description, reportID, total, category, keywords, taxRate, expenseType, tag, from, to

Invoice
Date, currency, merchant, description, reportID, total, category, keywords, taxRate, tag, from, to

Trip
Date, currency, merchant, description, reportID, total, category, keywords, taxRate, tag, from, to

Chat
Date, keywords, from, to, in, has, is

Assuming we want to confirm the full list, aren't we missing card? Then for total did we decide to make that context-specific or will we have distinct filters for expense-total and report-total?

I also think we should have card for invoice and trip given that those expenses could have been made on a credit card, right?

Finally comment is to for chats. This is who you sent any message to? That could get a little confusing, as I guess it's implied that it's from "you" and you can change that if you want? I'm not convinced we need that filter to start.

Assuming we want to confirm the full list, aren't we missing card?

Ah yes, I missed the card filter.

Then for total did we decide to make that context-specific or will we have distinct filters for expense-total and report-total?

This is what we have in the doc:

The syntax is context specific, so if you are searching for a total on the Expenses filter, you’re searching for expense totals. If you are searching for a total on report-focused filter (e.g. Drafts), then you’re searching for report totals.

This is who you sent any message to?

Correct. We can remove the filter from chats.

So the final list is:

Expense
Date, currency, merchant, description, reportID, total, category, keywords, taxRate, expenseType, tag, from, to, cardID

Invoice
Date, currency, merchant, description, reportID, total, category, keywords, taxRate, tag, from, to, cardID

Trip
Date, currency, merchant, description, reportID, total, category, keywords, taxRate, tag, from, to, cardID

Chat
Date, keywords, from, in, has, is

Does that look right?

rayane-d · 2024-08-29T10:17:27Z

@289Adam289 Instead of defining arrays for each type, I think we can avoid code repetition by defining a baseFilterConfig array and an array of keys for each type (based on this list: #47918 (comment)):

const baseFilterConfig = {
    date: { description: 'common.date', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_DATE, title: ... },
    currency: { description: 'common.currency', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_CURRENCY, title: ...},
    merchant: { description: 'common.merchant', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_MERCHANT, title: ... },
    description: { description: 'common.description', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_DESCRIPTION, title: ... },
    reportID: { description: 'common.reportID', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_REPORT_ID, title: ... },
    total: { description: 'common.total', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_AMOUNT,  title: ... },
    category: { description: 'common.category', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_CATEGORY,  title: ... },
    keywords: { description: 'search.filters.hasKeywords', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_KEYWORD,  title: ... },
    taxRate: { description: 'workspace.taxes.taxRate', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_TAX_RATE,  title: ... },
    expenseType: { description: 'search.expenseType', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_EXPENSE_TYPE,  title: ... },
    tag: { description: 'common.tag', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_TAG,  title: ... },
    from: { description: 'common.from', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_FROM,  title: ... },
    to: { description: 'common.to', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_TO,  title: ... },
    has: { description: 'search.filters.has', route: ROUTES.SEARCH_ADVANCED_FILTERS_HAS,  title: ... }
...
};

const typeFiltersKeys = {
    Expense: ['date', 'currency', 'merchant', 'description', 'reportID', 'total', 'category', 'keywords', 'taxRate', 'expenseType', 'tag', 'from', 'to'],
    Invoice: ['date', 'currency', 'merchant', 'description', 'reportID', 'total', 'category', 'keywords', 'taxRate', 'tag', 'from', 'to'],
    Trip: ['date', 'currency', 'merchant', 'description', 'reportID', 'total', 'category', 'keywords', 'taxRate', 'tag', 'from', 'to'],
    Chat: ['date', 'keywords', 'from', 'to', 'has'],
};

and then create the filters array dynamically based on the type:

const filters = useMemo(() => {
    return typeFiltersKeys[searchAdvancedFilters.type].map((key) => ({
        title: baseFilterConfig[key].title,
        description: translate(baseFilterConfig[key].description),
        route: baseFilterConfig[key].route
    }));
}, [searchAdvancedFilters]);

Another option is to define common filter subsets and then construct specific type configurations

289Adam289 · 2024-08-29T11:02:01Z

btw. this PR is waiting for #47789 merge because it's based on it.

289Adam289 · 2024-08-29T13:37:19Z

@rayane-djouah I applied changes suggested by you.

luacmartins

LGTM

rayane-d · 2024-08-29T18:25:01Z

We still need to address this comment: #47918 (comment)
cc @luacmartins for thoughts

289Adam289 · 2024-08-30T11:16:17Z

@Kicu and I have noticed that #47789 is taking a bit longer to merge then we thought. I think the best approach is to merge has filter without the grammar changes.

rayane-d · 2024-08-30T11:44:57Z

@289Adam289 - Accessing https://dev.new.expensify.com:8082/search?q=type%3Achat%20status%3Aall%20has%3Aattachment&isCustomQuery=true gives a 402 error response:

rayane-d · 2024-08-30T11:49:11Z

I'm not sure whether the cause of the error is that the backend isn't ready for the 'has' filter or if we're missing something on the frontend

rayane-d · 2024-08-30T13:55:12Z

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

Screen.Recording.2024-08-30.at.2.53.34.PM.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2024-08-30.at.2.51.47.PM.mov

iOS: Native

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.Max.-.2024-08-30.at.14.39.31.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.Max.-.2024-08-30.at.14.38.13.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-08-30.at.2.36.27.PM.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-08-30.at.2.49.22.PM.mov

rayane-d

LGTM

rayane-d · 2024-08-30T13:56:26Z

@luacmartins - What do you think about #47918 (comment)?

rayane-d · 2024-08-30T14:33:17Z

Backend is returning a correct response for the In filter, see: #47676 (comment)
Not sure why we're getting an error for the has filter - #47918 (comment)

luacmartins · 2024-08-30T14:35:41Z

@rayane-djouah the backend is not ready for has 🙈

luacmartins

LGTM

luacmartins · 2024-08-30T18:14:47Z

I have a PR up to add the has filter to the API. I'll merge this one since it's still not available to users

OSBotify · 2024-08-30T18:33:07Z

✋ 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 · 2024-09-02T23:44:56Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.28-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2024-09-03T23:25:32Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.0.28-3 🚀

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

289Adam289 added 5 commits August 21, 2024 15:07

simplify AST for multiselect values

fc6d65a

grammar clean up and review suggestions

b869cfd

correct typos

6d0f448

Merge branch 'main' into 289Adam289/47497-advanced-filters-has

915a566

Add keyword advanced filter for Search

d9590f3

289Adam289 commented Aug 23, 2024

View reviewed changes

src/languages/es.ts Show resolved Hide resolved

289Adam289 added 2 commits August 26, 2024 10:22

Merge branch 'main' into 289Adam289/47497-advanced-filters-has

ef228ed

fix empty selected items on native

879ec34

Kicu approved these changes Aug 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

review suggestions

101ed2e

289Adam289 marked this pull request as ready for review August 26, 2024 15:40

289Adam289 requested a review from a team as a code owner August 26, 2024 15:40

melvin-bot bot requested a review from rayane-d August 26, 2024 15:40

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team August 26, 2024 15:40

luacmartins requested changes Aug 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

src/pages/Search/AdvancedSearchFilters.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

289Adam289 added 3 commits August 27, 2024 10:11

Merge branch 'main' into 289Adam289/47497-advanced-filters-has

2b8f7a7

add shouldShow to filters

1331d53

fix variable names

ffd9a88

rayane-d reviewed Aug 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

src/pages/Search/AdvancedSearchFilters.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

rayane-d reviewed Aug 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

src/pages/Search/AdvancedSearchFilters.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

rayane-d reviewed Aug 27, 2024

View reviewed changes

289Adam289 added 3 commits August 28, 2024 14:33

add getFilterHasDisplayTitle

9ec3a4c

fix bug

ebd2685

add filter arrays

efe98a3

luacmartins requested a review from rayane-d August 28, 2024 20:07

rayane-d mentioned this pull request Aug 29, 2024

[Search v2.1] Create In filter #46030 #47676

Merged

50 tasks

improve advaanced filter page

65e444f

luacmartins previously approved these changes Aug 29, 2024

View reviewed changes

fix function name

1638051

289Adam289 dismissed luacmartins’s stale review via 1638051 August 30, 2024 10:45

289Adam289 added 2 commits August 30, 2024 13:03

Merge branch 'main' into 289Adam289/47497-advanced-filters-has

74f91f7

fix grammar nad parser

4ce3a1d

rayane-d approved these changes Aug 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from luacmartins August 30, 2024 13:56

luacmartins approved these changes Aug 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

luacmartins merged commit 5cbff0b into Expensify:main Aug 30, 2024

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Sep 2, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-09-02 #48438

Closed

46 tasks

rayane-d mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2024

[HOLD for Payment 2024-09-10][$250] [Search v2.2] Create chat filter - Has #47497

Closed

rayane-d mentioned this pull request Sep 23, 2024

[HOLD for Payment 2024-09-19][Search v2.1] Set currently applied filters on Advanced Filters Page upon clicking Filters Button #48156

Closed

		const shouldShowExpenseSpecificFilter = currentType === CONST.SEARCH.DATA_TYPES.EXPENSE;
		const shouldShowChatSpecificFilter = currentType === CONST.SEARCH.DATA_TYPES.CHAT;

Conversation

289Adam289 commented Aug 23, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Kicu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Aug 26, 2024

Uh oh!

luacmartins left a comment • 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!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rayane-d Aug 27, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

luacmartins Aug 27, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

289Adam289 Aug 28, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

luacmartins Aug 28, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JmillsExpensify Aug 29, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

luacmartins Aug 29, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rayane-d commented Aug 29, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

289Adam289 commented Aug 29, 2024

Uh oh!

289Adam289 commented Aug 29, 2024

Uh oh!

luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rayane-d commented Aug 29, 2024

Uh oh!

289Adam289 commented Aug 30, 2024

Uh oh!

rayane-d commented Aug 30, 2024

Uh oh!

rayane-d commented Aug 30, 2024

Uh oh!

rayane-d commented Aug 30, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

rayane-d left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rayane-d commented Aug 30, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rayane-d commented Aug 30, 2024

Uh oh!

luacmartins commented Aug 30, 2024

Uh oh!

luacmartins left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

289Adam289 commented Aug 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

luacmartins left a comment •

edited

Loading

rayane-d commented Aug 29, 2024 •

edited

Loading

rayane-d commented Aug 30, 2024 •

edited

Loading