fix negative amount #51122

Nodebrute · 2024-10-19T14:59:49Z

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

[User A] Submit two expenses to User B.
[User A] Hold one of the expenses.
[User B] Go offline.
[User B] Pay the unheld expense.
[User B] Click on the expense preview of the held expense in the main chat.
[User B] Verify the amount in the transaction thread will not be negative.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as above

QA Steps

[User A] Submit two expenses to User B.
[User A] Hold one of the expenses.
[User B] Go offline.
[User B] Pay the unheld expense.
[User B] Click on the expense preview of the held expense in the main chat.
[User B] Verify the amount in the transaction thread will not be negative.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-10-19.at.9.01.49.PM.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2024-10-19.at.9.05.10.PM.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-10-19.at.8.32.45.PM.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-10-19.at.8.30.05.PM.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-10-19.at.8.15.17.PM.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-10-19.at.8.23.01.PM.mov

melvin-bot · 2024-10-22T22:53:57Z

@hungvu193 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]

hungvu193 · 2024-10-24T08:49:07Z

Little update:
Still testing related flows

hungvu193 · 2024-10-25T07:55:11Z

Got this issue while testing however I can't reproduce it consistently

Screen.Recording.2024-10-25.at.14.54.32.mov

hungvu193 · 2024-10-25T08:34:13Z

Nevermind, I can repro on Staging as well, BE returned wrong iouReportID.

hungvu193 · 2024-10-25T09:28:00Z

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

Uploading Screen Recording 2024-10-25 at 16.21.10.mov…

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2024-10-25.at.16.21.10.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2024-10-25.at.16.02.41.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-10-25.at.16.11.59.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-10-25.at.15.20.02.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-10-25.at.15.26.37.mov

hungvu193

Tests well!

blimpich · 2024-10-25T17:18:11Z

@Nodebrute could we add a jest test so that we make sure this issue doesn't regress in the future?

blimpich · 2024-10-28T23:34:09Z

@Nodebrute friendly bump on this comment.

Nodebrute · 2024-10-29T02:40:15Z

Will update this in a few hours.

Nodebrute · 2024-10-29T18:34:57Z

@hungvu193 Can you help me with the tests here, TIA!

hungvu193 · 2024-10-30T02:33:39Z

How about this?

describe('Check valid amout for IOU/Expense request', () => {
    test('IOU amount should be positive', () => {
        const iouReport = ReportUtils.buildOptimisticIOUReport(1, 2, 100, '1', 'USD');
        const iouTransaction = TransactionUtils.buildOptimisticTransaction(100, 'USD', iouReport.reportID);
        const iouAmount = TransactionUtils.getAmount(iouTransaction, false, false);
        expect(iouAmount).toBeGreaterThan(0);
    });

    test('Expense amount should be negative', () => {
        const expenseReport = ReportUtils.buildOptimisticExpenseReport('212', '123', 100, 122, 'USD');
        const expenseTransaction = TransactionUtils.buildOptimisticTransaction(100, 'USD', expenseReport.reportID);
        const expenseAmount = TransactionUtils.getAmount(expenseTransaction, true, false);
        expect(expenseAmount).toBeLessThan(0);
    });
});

Result:

Any thoughts? @blimpich

Nodebrute · 2024-10-30T12:54:42Z

Thanks @hungvu193.

blimpich · 2024-10-30T16:12:16Z

Any thoughts? @blimpich

Looks good to me! Thank you!

blimpich · 2024-10-30T18:05:11Z

@Nodebrute can we add those tests to the PR?

Nodebrute · 2024-10-30T19:53:31Z

I've added the tests! Thanks again, @hungvu193, for the help. @blimpich, it's all yours now.

blimpich

Small typo, fix that and we're good to go!

blimpich · 2024-10-30T20:54:23Z

tests/unit/IOUUtilsTest.ts

@@ -146,3 +146,19 @@ describe('isValidMoneyRequestType', () => {
        expect(IOUUtils.isValidMoneyRequestType('money')).toBe(false);
    });
 });
+
+describe('Check valid amout for IOU/Expense request', () => {


Suggested change

describe('Check valid amout for IOU/Expense request', () => {

describe('Check valid amount for IOU/Expense request', () => {

OSBotify · 2024-10-30T23:01:23Z

✋ 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 · 2024-10-31T11:40:45Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.0.56-0 🚀

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

fix negative amount

ccecd19

Nodebrute marked this pull request as ready for review October 22, 2024 22:53

Nodebrute requested a review from a team as a code owner October 22, 2024 22:53

melvin-bot bot requested a review from hungvu193 October 22, 2024 22:53

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team October 22, 2024 22:53

Merge branch 'Expensify:main' into negativeamount

a057190

hungvu193 approved these changes Oct 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from blimpich October 25, 2024 09:28

blimpich assigned Nodebrute Oct 25, 2024

add tests

6c4547d

blimpich requested changes Oct 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

fix typo

d734c9c

blimpich approved these changes Oct 30, 2024

View reviewed changes

blimpich merged commit 91214d3 into Expensify:main Oct 30, 2024
17 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Oct 31, 2024

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2024-10-31 #51778

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

fix negative amount #51122

fix negative amount #51122

Nodebrute commented Oct 19, 2024 •

edited

Loading

melvin-bot bot commented Oct 22, 2024

hungvu193 commented Oct 24, 2024

hungvu193 commented Oct 25, 2024

hungvu193 commented Oct 25, 2024

hungvu193 commented Oct 25, 2024

hungvu193 left a comment

blimpich commented Oct 25, 2024

blimpich commented Oct 28, 2024

Nodebrute commented Oct 29, 2024

Nodebrute commented Oct 29, 2024

hungvu193 commented Oct 30, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Nodebrute commented Oct 30, 2024

blimpich commented Oct 30, 2024

blimpich commented Oct 30, 2024

Nodebrute commented Oct 30, 2024

blimpich left a comment

blimpich Oct 30, 2024

Nodebrute Oct 30, 2024

OSBotify commented Oct 30, 2024

github-actions bot commented Oct 31, 2024

	describe('Check valid amout for IOU/Expense request', () => {
	describe('Check valid amount for IOU/Expense request', () => {

fix negative amount #51122

fix negative amount #51122

Conversation

Nodebrute commented Oct 19, 2024 • edited Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

melvin-bot bot commented Oct 22, 2024

hungvu193 commented Oct 24, 2024

hungvu193 commented Oct 25, 2024

hungvu193 commented Oct 25, 2024

hungvu193 commented Oct 25, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

hungvu193 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

blimpich commented Oct 25, 2024

blimpich commented Oct 28, 2024

Nodebrute commented Oct 29, 2024

Nodebrute commented Oct 29, 2024

hungvu193 commented Oct 30, 2024 • edited Loading

Nodebrute commented Oct 30, 2024

blimpich commented Oct 30, 2024

blimpich commented Oct 30, 2024

Nodebrute commented Oct 30, 2024

blimpich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

blimpich Oct 30, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Nodebrute Oct 30, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Oct 30, 2024

github-actions bot commented Oct 31, 2024

Nodebrute commented Oct 19, 2024 •

edited

Loading

hungvu193 commented Oct 30, 2024 •

edited

Loading