Fix new message is shown when send message

[bernhardoj]

Details

When the current user sends a message, an unread marker is shown.

Fixed Issues

$ #50469
PROPOSAL: #50469 (comment)

Tests

Same as QA Steps

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as QA Steps

QA Steps

1. Open any chat that is scrollable
2. Scroll to the top
3. Send a message and immediately scroll to the top*
4. Go back to the bottom and verify there is no unread marker

*an easier way is to go offline and no need to immediately scroll to the top, especially on small screen

• 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: 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.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

ios.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios.mweb.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

desktop.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@ikevin127 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]

[bernhardoj]

I can't send message on android mWeb.

android.mweb.mp4

[ikevin127]

@bernhardoj Thanks, this looks good and works well in all tests, except for this 1 issue:

Tip

Steps to reproduce

1. Open any chat that is scrollable.
2. Go offline (⌘ + D > Force offline -> ON).
3. Send 3 messages while offline (they will show with reduced opacity).
4. Scroll to the top such that the new offline sent messages cannot be seen.
5. Go back online (⌘ + D > Force offline -> OFF).
6. Once the messages are posted, while still at the top of the list, scroll slightly up and down.
7. Notice that the new message marker and pill are showing above the first of the 3 messages sent while offline, which shouldn't happen because the messages were sent by the same user (while offline).

issue-1.mov

[bernhardoj]

Fixed by changing the check here to return false as long as lastActionAddedByCurrentUser exists. What happened before is, we only store the last action in lastActionAddedByCurrentUser. So, when we send message 1,2,3, the lastActionAddedByCurrentUser will be 3 and unreadMarkerTime is updated to 3's created.

When we receive the BE response, the 1 created value will be bigger than the optimistic 3 created value and previously, we only prevent the unread marker to show if lastActionAddedByCurrentUser is the same as the action that is being checked.

[ikevin127]

@bernhardoj Thanks, #51113 (comment) fixed the issue I reported here for large layout devices (Web / Desktop) but it seems to still be reproducible only on Android: mWeb for example (second half, the offline -> online case):

android-mweb.webm

[bernhardoj]

Ah, that's because lastActionAddedByCurrentUser is only a ref which is cleared when you close the page. Hmm, this is really tricky.

[bernhardoj]

I have a new idea to solve it, but still fails for manually mark as unread.

[ikevin127]

@bernhardoj I don't know if it's worth fixing the Android: mWeb only edge case at the expense of the manually mark as unread functionality. I vote to leave it as is now as the only edge case is happening on Android: mWeb and only in this scenario:

1. Open any chat that is scrollable.
2. Go offline (⌘ + D > Force offline -> ON).
3. Send 3 messages while offline (they will show with reduced opacity).
4. Scroll to the top such that the new offline sent messages cannot be seen.
5. Go back online (⌘ + D > Force offline -> OFF).
6. Once the messages are posted, while still at the top of the list, scroll slightly up and down.
7. Notice that the new message marker and pill are showing above the first of the 3 messages sent while offline, which shouldn't happen because the messages were sent by the same user (while offline).

@MonilBhavsar What do you think ?

[bernhardoj]

@ikevin127 hmm, but this will still happen too.

Here is my new idea. So, the base of the idea is, if the message is new or if it's previously an optimistic one and it's the current user message, then don't show the unread marker.

How do we know this without lastActionAddedByCurrentUser?

if the message is new or if it's previously an optimistic one

We can know that by comparing the current action with the previous action. So first, we need to convert the actions array to an object first, so it can easily be looked up through reportActionID, then store the previous value using usePrevious.

App/src/pages/home/report/ReportActionsList.tsx

Lines 188 to 200 in f251dbc

	const sortedVisibleReportActions = useMemo(
	() =>
	sortedReportActions.filter(
	(reportAction) =>
	(isOffline ||
	ReportActionsUtils.isDeletedParentAction(reportAction) ||
	reportAction.pendingAction !== CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.DELETE ||
	reportAction.errors) &&
	ReportActionsUtils.shouldReportActionBeVisible(reportAction, reportAction.reportActionID),
	),
	[sortedReportActions, isOffline],
	);

const sortedVisibleReportActionsObjects: OnyxTypes.ReportActions = useMemo(() => sortedVisibleReportActions.reduce((acc, action) => {
    Object.assign(acc, {[action.reportActionID]: action});
    return acc;
}, {}), [sortedVisibleReportActions]);
const prevSortedVisibleReportActionsObjects = usePrevious(sortedVisibleReportActionsObjects);

In shouldDisplayNewMarker, we do the comparison.

App/src/pages/home/report/ReportActionsList.tsx

Lines 219 to 227 in f251dbc

	const unreadMarkerReportActionID = useMemo(() => {
	const shouldDisplayNewMarker = (reportAction: OnyxTypes.ReportAction, index: number): boolean => {
	const nextMessage = sortedVisibleReportActions.at(index + 1);
	const isCurrentMessageUnread = isMessageUnread(reportAction, unreadMarkerTime);
	const isNextMessageRead = !nextMessage || !isMessageUnread(nextMessage, unreadMarkerTime);
	const shouldDisplay = isCurrentMessageUnread && isNextMessageRead && !ReportActionsUtils.shouldHideNewMarker(reportAction);
	const isWithinVisibleThreshold = scrollingVerticalOffset.current < MSG_VISIBLE_THRESHOLD ? reportAction.created < (userActiveSince.current ?? '') : true;
	return shouldDisplay && isWithinVisibleThreshold;
	};

// This checks if the message from the current user
const isFromCurrentUser = accountID === (ReportActionsUtils.isReportPreviewAction(reportAction) ? !reportAction.childLastActorAccountID : reportAction.actorAccountID);
// This checks if it's a new message. It's a new message if it's not available in the previous actions
const isNewMessage = !prevSortedVisibleReportActionsObjects[reportAction.reportActionID];
// This checks if it's previously an optimistic message
const isPreviouslyOptimistic = !!prevSortedVisibleReportActionsObjects[reportAction.reportActionID]?.isOptimisticAction && !reportAction.isOptimisticAction;
// All combined
const shouldIgnoreUnreadForCurrentUserMessage = isFromCurrentUser && (isNewMessage || isPreviouslyOptimistic);

So, when the user adds a message, isFromCurrentUser and isNewMessage are both true, so shouldIgnoreUnreadForCurrentUserMessage is true. When the user marks the message as unread, isNewMessage will be false already, so shouldIgnoreUnreadForCurrentUserMessage is false.

However, we still have a manual mark as unread for isPreviouslyOptimistic. Consider this case,

1. Go offline and send a message (isNewMessage = true, shouldIgnoreUnreadForCurrentUserMessage = true)
2. Mark the message as unread (isNewMessage = false, shouldIgnoreUnreadForCurrentUserMessage = false)
3. Go online (isNewMessage = false, isPreviouslyOptimistic = true, shouldIgnoreUnreadForCurrentUserMessage = true)

I expected in step 3, the unread marker stays, but it disappeared. In main, this also doesn't work well because of isWithinVisibleThreshold. But even if we remove isWithinVisibleThreshold, the issue still happens and it's because of the isPreviouslyOptimistic is true.

I'm not suggesting removing isWithinVisibleThreshold yet, but I'm still trying to fix the case above by removing isWithinVisibleThreshold locally and instead updating the shouldIgnoreUnreadForCurrentUserMessage condition to check if there is an unread marker previously.

const unreadMarkerReportActionID = useMemo(() => {
    ...
    const shouldIgnoreUnreadForCurrentUserMessage = !prevUnreadMarkerReportActionID.current && isFromCurrentUser && (isNewMessage || isPreviouslyOptimistic);
    return shouldDisplay && isWithinVisibleThreshold && !shouldIgnoreUnreadForCurrentUserMessage;
    // If you want to verify the case above, remove isWithinVisibleThreshold
    ...
}, [...]);
prevUnreadMarkerReportActionID.current = unreadMarkerReportActionID;

It's not the best in terms of performance since we need to convert the array to an object, but I think it's much more reliable than the other solution that we explored. @ikevin127 Let me know if that makes sense to you!

[ikevin127]

@bernhardoj Thanks for the detailed explanation!

Given my statement from #51113 (comment), looks like that would be one option in terms of compromising.

If you were to apply the solution you suggested above, what would be the drawbacks of that in terms of functionality other than the performance of array -> object ? ? Meaning if we apply that solution would:

• unread marker / pill wouldn't show up for current user when posting and scrolling up fast (the issue)
• unread marker / pill wouldn't show up for current user when posting and scrolling up fast while on the same account but different session
• the unread marker / pill wouldn't show up for current user when posting while offline and scrolled up then going back online
• mark the message as unread works correctly in both online / offline -> online cases

all of these scenarios pass the test ? From what I can tell currently it looks like we would have to compromise somewhere, am I wrong and we can have all these working ?

[bernhardoj]

So far it works well on all those cases.

unread marker / pill wouldn't show up for current user when posting and scrolling up fast (the issue)

web.1.mp4

unread marker / pill wouldn't show up for current user when posting and scrolling up fast while on the same account but different session

web.2.mp4

the unread marker / pill wouldn't show up for current user when posting while offline and scrolled up then going back online

web.3.mp4

mark the message as unread works correctly in both online / offline -> online cases

web.4.mp4

Notice the unread marker disappears when go online as I mentioned before

3. Go online (isNewMessage = false, isPreviouslyOptimistic = true, shouldIgnoreUnreadForCurrentUserMessage = true)
   I expected in step 3, the unread marker stays, but it disappeared. In main, this also doesn't work well because of isWithinVisibleThreshold. But even if we remove isWithinVisibleThreshold, the issue still happens and it's because of the isPreviouslyOptimistic is true.

Here is the video showing the unread marker stays when removing isWithinVisibleThreshold.

web.5.mp4

[ikevin127]

@bernhardoj I appreciate the tests for each case! I'm fine with the behaviour of the second to last video, meaning keeping isWithinVisibleThreshold but ultimately we should go with the solution that preserves the behaviour that is currently on staging - so if that means keeping or removing isWithinVisibleThreshold then we should go with that solution as the main goal here is to fix our issue without breaking previously working functionality.

You can proceed with the changes and I will test again before moving forward with completing the checklist and approving.

[bernhardoj]

@ikevin127 done. Please check! 🙇

[ikevin127]

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.webm

Android: mWeb Chrome

android-mweb.webm

iOS: Native

ios.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios-mweb.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

MacOS: Desktop

desktop.mov

[ikevin127]

@bernhardoj Thanks for the updates, code looks solid! 🎉

🟢 I just retested all scenarios including testing against the current staging build to ensure nothing was changed except related to our fix and all tests pass now, including on Android: mWeb where we had the issues with the marker not going away when returning online.

[MonilBhavsar]

looks good, thank you all! 🚀

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/MonilBhavsar in version: 9.0.55-0 🚀

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

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Beamanator in version: 9.0.55-10 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	skipped 🚫
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	skipped 🚫