Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix: day or year view render on event page #3378

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: develop-postgres
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

PratapRathi
Copy link
Contributor

@PratapRathi PratapRathi commented Jan 21, 2025

What kind of change does this PR introduce?
This PR will fix the rendering error on event page when select the year or day view.
We conditionally rendering the 'renderHours' function which has useMemo hook so react produce error "rendered more hooks than previous" so useMemo hook is removed from renderHour function.

Issue Number:

Fixes #3279

Snapshots/Videos:

Screen.Recording.2025-01-21.at.21.31.35.mov

If relevant, did you update the documentation?
N/A

Summary
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No

Checklist

CodeRabbit AI Review

  • I have reviewed and addressed all critical issues flagged by CodeRabbit AI
  • I have implemented or provided justification for each non-critical suggestion
  • I have documented my reasoning in the PR comments where CodeRabbit AI suggestions were not implemented

Test Coverage

  • I have written tests for all new changes/features
  • I have verified that test coverage meets or exceeds 95%
  • I have run the test suite locally and all tests pass

Other information

Have you read the contributing guide?
Yes

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Enhanced user interface for sorting options in the Event Header with clearer string labels.
    • Added a test case to verify the rendering of the hour view in the Event Calendar.
  • Refactor

    • Simplified the logic for determining whether to show the "View more" button in the Event Calendar component by removing unnecessary memoization.
    • Streamlined the JSX structure in the Calendar component for improved readability.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Updated test cases to ensure correct interaction simulation with the Event Header component.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 21, 2025

Walkthrough

The pull request involves modifications to the EventCalendar.tsx file, specifically in the renderHours function and the overall structure of the Calendar component. The logic for filtering allDayEventsList has been simplified, and the shouldShowViewMore variable is now a direct boolean expression. Additionally, the JSX structure of the Calendar component has been adjusted, including the removal of a specific class name and unnecessary <div> elements. New tests have been added to ensure the correct rendering of the hour view in the calendar.

Changes

File Change Summary
src/components/EventCalendar/EventCalendar.tsx Simplified filtering logic for allDayEventsList, replaced useMemo with direct boolean for shouldShowViewMore, adjusted JSX structure.
src/components/EventCalendar/EventCalendar.spec.tsx Added new test case for rendering the hour view in the Calendar component.
src/components/EventCalendar/EventHeader.spec.tsx Updated identifiers in test cases for handleChangeView to match current implementation, added async keyword to relevant test case.
src/components/EventCalendar/EventHeader.tsx Changed sorting option labels from enum values to string literals for better clarity.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective Addressed Explanation
Render day and year view on Organization Event page [#3279]

Possibly related PRs

  • Tests for newly created events #2410: This PR modifies the test suite for the EventCalendar component, which is directly related to the changes made in the EventCalendar.tsx file of the main PR, particularly in the context of event rendering and display logic.
  • [FIX] Events Page Violates The Figma Style Guide #3280: This PR also modifies the EventCalendar.tsx file, commenting out the handleTodayButton function, which is part of the same component being altered in the main PR. The changes reflect a focus on the UI and functionality of the calendar component.

Suggested labels

ignore-sensitive-files-pr

Suggested reviewers

  • palisadoes

Poem

🐰 A rabbit hops with joy today,
The calendar's bright, come what may,
With clearer views and tests in place,
Events now dance in their rightful space!
🗓️✨


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

Our Pull Request Approval Process

Thanks for contributing!

Testing Your Code

Remember, your PRs won't be reviewed until these criteria are met:

  1. We don't merge PRs with poor code quality.
    1. Follow coding best practices such that CodeRabbit.ai approves your PR.
  2. We don't merge PRs with failed tests.
    1. When tests fail, click on the Details link to learn more.
    2. Write sufficient tests for your changes (CodeCov Patch Test). Your testing level must be better than the target threshold of the repository
    3. Tests may fail if you edit sensitive files. Ask to add the ignore-sensitive-files-pr label if the edits are necessary.
  3. We cannot merge PRs with conflicting files. These must be fixed.

Our policies make our code better.

Reviewers

Do not assign reviewers. Our Queue Monitors will review your PR and assign them.
When your PR has been assigned reviewers contact them to get your code reviewed and approved via:

  1. comments in this PR or
  2. our slack channel

Reviewing Your Code

Your reviewer(s) will have the following roles:

  1. arbitrators of future discussions with other contributors about the validity of your changes
  2. point of contact for evaluating the validity of your work
  3. person who verifies matching issues by others that should be closed.
  4. person who gives general guidance in fixing your tests

CONTRIBUTING.md

Read our CONTRIBUTING.md file. Most importantly:

  1. PRs with issues not assigned to you will be closed by the reviewer
  2. Fix the first comment in the PR so that each issue listed automatically closes

Other

  1. 🎯 Please be considerate of our volunteers' time. Contacting the person who assigned the reviewers is not advised unless they ask for your input. Do not @ the person who did the assignment otherwise.
  2. Read the CONTRIBUTING.md file make

coderabbitai[bot]
coderabbitai bot previously approved these changes Jan 21, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 21, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.69%. Comparing base (a32533b) to head (940dba4).
Report is 4 commits behind head on develop-postgres.

Additional details and impacted files
@@                  Coverage Diff                  @@
##           develop-postgres    #3378       +/-   ##
=====================================================
+ Coverage              7.95%   89.69%   +81.73%     
=====================================================
  Files                   312      335       +23     
  Lines                  8109     8634      +525     
  Branches               1803     1919      +116     
=====================================================
+ Hits                    645     7744     +7099     
+ Misses                 7397      631     -6766     
- Partials                 67      259      +192     
Flag Coverage Δ
combined 89.69% <100.00%> (?)
jest 7.93% <0.00%> (?)
vitest 89.69% <100.00%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@palisadoes palisadoes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  1. This is not fixed.
  2. Though the screen is rendered. None of the events for that day are listed.
  3. Additionally
    image

Copy link
Contributor

@palisadoes palisadoes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please add tests to ensure this doesn't happen again.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
src/components/EventCalendar/EventCalendar.spec.tsx (1)

441-447: Consider enhancing the hour view test coverage.

While the test correctly verifies the presence of the hour view component, consider adding additional assertions to verify:

  1. The correct rendering of hour slots
  2. The proper display of events within the hour view
  3. Edge cases like events spanning multiple hours

This would provide better coverage for the day view rendering fixes mentioned in the PR objectives.

Here's a suggested enhancement to the test:

 it('render the hour view', async () => {
   render(<Calendar eventData={eventData} viewType={ViewType.DAY} />);

   await wait();
   const renderHourComponent = screen.getByTestId('hour');
   expect(renderHourComponent).toBeInTheDocument();
+  
+  // Verify hour slots are rendered
+  const hourSlots = screen.getAllByTestId(/hour-slot/);
+  expect(hourSlots).toHaveLength(24); // 24 hours in a day
+  
+  // Verify events are rendered in correct slots
+  const event = screen.getByText('Event 1');
+  expect(event).toBeInTheDocument();
+  expect(event.closest('[data-testid="hour-slot-10"]')).toBeInTheDocument(); // Event 1 starts at 10:00
 });
📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 42303cb and 940dba4.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • src/components/EventCalendar/EventCalendar.spec.tsx (1 hunks)
  • src/components/EventCalendar/EventCalendar.tsx (3 hunks)
  • src/components/EventCalendar/EventHeader.spec.tsx (1 hunks)
  • src/components/EventCalendar/EventHeader.tsx (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • src/components/EventCalendar/EventCalendar.tsx
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
  • GitHub Check: Test Application
🔇 Additional comments (2)
src/components/EventCalendar/EventHeader.spec.tsx (1)

52-52: LGTM! Test identifiers updated correctly.

The test now uses the correct test ID 'Day' which matches the component implementation, and properly wraps the async operation in an act() call.

src/components/EventCalendar/EventHeader.tsx (1)

92-94: LGTM! Improved dropdown labels for better UX.

The labels are now more user-friendly while maintaining the correct ViewType enum values internally.

@PratapRathi
Copy link
Contributor Author

  1. Scrollbar is removed
  2. added new test case for day view.
  3. removed duplicate component of day and year view
  4. Event are listed in day view

Earlier- duplicate element visible on day and calendar view

Screenshot 2025-01-22 at 11 00 51

Now
Screen_recording

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants