[TS Migration] Improve selector and key typings for withOnyx

[fabioh8010]

Details

This PR fixes and improves typings for selector and key in withOnyx HOC.

Related Issues

Automated Tests

Manual Tests

Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Related 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 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 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 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
  • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
  • 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 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 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

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

[tgolen]

Why is this better (or different) than TComponentProps & TOnyxProps? It appears to me like this is omitting properties, and then adding them right back with an intersection.

[fabioh8010]

We are doing two things here:

1. First, we omit the TOnyxProps from TComponentProps props because, when using the HOC, we pass TComponentProps and TOnyxProps separately, but TComponentProps always have all the props from TOnyxProps.
2. Now with that, we make a union with Partial<TOnyxProps> to make the Onyx props optional, because as @blazejkustra correctly pointed out the Onyx props are not available in this key function during the first render.

We can't do TComponentProps & Partial<TOnyxProps> directly because as TComponentProps has TOnyxProps props, making a union with Partial<TOnyxProps> won't make them optional.

In fact, if it weren't by the optional Onyx props, we could just do TComponentProps because TComponentProps always has all Onyx props from TOnyxProps. Here is an example.

[tgolen]

Thanks for the explanation!

[situchan]

does this repo require reviewer checklist?

[tgolen]

No, there is no checklist for the repo. I'm not exactly sure why @bondydaa added you :D When the PR is made to NewDot to update this library version, it should get a C+ review then (with the regular checklist).

[tgolen]

If you want to review this, that's perfectly fine, but feel free to pass and I will just merge this now. Let me know what you prefer.

[situchan]

Please feel free to merge (I already reviewed and approved).

[bondydaa]

I'm not exactly sure why @bondydaa added you :D

Yeah sorry! I didn't realize this was the onyx repo before asking and then assigning.