PromucFlow_constructor/app/client/src/sagas/EvalWorkerActionSagas.ts

142 lines
4.1 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Normal View History

fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
import { all, call, put, spawn, take } from "redux-saga/effects";
import { ReduxActionTypes } from "@appsmith/constants/ReduxActionConstants";
import { MAIN_THREAD_ACTION } from "@appsmith/workers/Evaluation/evalWorkerActions";
import log from "loglevel";
import { evalErrorHandler } from "../sagas/PostEvaluationSagas";
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com> ## Description This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export) syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge it easily. As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily: - add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and - re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes: https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is merged.) ### Why is this needed? This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3, we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function. However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you this: <img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png"> That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it, we need to upgrade to Prettier 2. ### Why enforce `import type`? Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.) I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes refactorings easier. Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!) ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import { Position } from "codemirror"; import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` It’s pretty hard, right? What about now? ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import type { Position } from "codemirror"; import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled. This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it _also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where `codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from "codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports. This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only imports anymore. ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? This was tested to not break the build. ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
import type { Channel } from "redux-saga";
import { storeLogs } from "../sagas/DebuggerSagas";
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com> ## Description This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export) syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge it easily. As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily: - add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and - re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes: https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is merged.) ### Why is this needed? This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3, we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function. However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you this: <img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png"> That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it, we need to upgrade to Prettier 2. ### Why enforce `import type`? Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.) I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes refactorings easier. Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!) ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import { Position } from "codemirror"; import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` It’s pretty hard, right? What about now? ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import type { Position } from "codemirror"; import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled. This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it _also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where `codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from "codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports. This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only imports anymore. ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? This was tested to not break the build. ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
import type {
BatchedJSExecutionData,
BatchedJSExecutionErrors,
} from "reducers/entityReducers/jsActionsReducer";
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com> ## Description This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export) syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge it easily. As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily: - add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and - re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes: https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is merged.) ### Why is this needed? This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/commit/7cbb12af886621256224be0c93e6a465dd710ad3, we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function. However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you this: <img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png"> That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it, we need to upgrade to Prettier 2. ### Why enforce `import type`? Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.) I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes refactorings easier. Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!) ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import { Position } from "codemirror"; import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` It’s pretty hard, right? What about now? ```ts // app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts import type { Position } from "codemirror"; import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint"; import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash"; ``` Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled. This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it _also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where `codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from "codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports. This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only imports anymore. ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? This was tested to not break the build. ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
2023-03-16 11:41:47 +00:00
import type { TMessage } from "utils/MessageUtil";
import { MessageType } from "utils/MessageUtil";
import type { ResponsePayload } from "../sagas/EvaluationsSaga";
import {
evalWorker,
executeTriggerRequestSaga,
} from "../sagas/EvaluationsSaga";
import { logJSFunctionExecution } from "@appsmith/sagas/JSFunctionExecutionSaga";
import { handleStoreOperations } from "./ActionExecution/StoreActionSaga";
fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
import isEmpty from "lodash/isEmpty";
import { sortJSExecutionDataByCollectionId } from "workers/Evaluation/JSObject/utils";
export function* handleEvalWorkerRequestSaga(listenerChannel: Channel<any>) {
while (true) {
const request: TMessage<any> = yield take(listenerChannel);
yield spawn(handleEvalWorkerMessage, request);
}
}
export function* lintTreeActionHandler(message: any) {
const { body } = message;
const { data } = body;
yield put({
type: ReduxActionTypes.LINT_TREE,
payload: {
pathsToLint: data.lintOrder,
unevalTree: data.unevalTree,
fix: Improving performance of JS evaluations by splitting the data tree (#21547) ## Description This is the second phase of the split data tree. In the previous version, we collected all config paths in each entity and put them in the `__config__` property. All those config properties do get inserted into final data tree which we don't need at all. As part of this change, we will be creating another tree i.e **'configTree'** which will contain all config of each entity. unEvalTree is split into 2 trees => 1. unEvalTree 2. configTree Example: previous unEvalTree Api1 content <img width="1766" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215990868-0b095421-e7b8-44bc-89aa-065b35e237d6.png"> After this change unEvalTree Api1 content <img width="1758" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215991045-506fb10a-645a-4aad-8e77-0f3786a86977.png"> Note- above example doesn't have '__config__' property configTree Api1 content <img width="1760" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7846888/215991169-a2e03443-5d6a-4ff1-97c5-a12593e46395.png"> ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - #11351 ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - Cypress ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com>
2023-03-20 11:04:02 +00:00
configTree: data.configTree,
},
});
}
export function* processLogsHandler(message: any) {
const { body } = message;
const { data } = body;
fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
yield call(storeLogs, data);
}
export function* processJSFunctionExecution(message: any) {
const { body } = message;
const {
data: { JSExecutionData, JSExecutionErrors },
} = body;
const {
sortedData,
sortedErrors,
}: {
sortedData: BatchedJSExecutionData;
sortedErrors: BatchedJSExecutionErrors;
fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
} = yield* sortJSExecutionDataByCollectionId(
JSExecutionData,
JSExecutionErrors,
);
if (!isEmpty(sortedData)) {
yield put({
type: ReduxActionTypes.SET_JS_FUNCTION_EXECUTION_DATA,
payload: sortedData,
});
}
if (!isEmpty(sortedErrors)) {
yield put({
type: ReduxActionTypes.SET_JS_FUNCTION_EXECUTION_ERRORS,
payload: sortedErrors,
});
}
}
export function* processTriggerHandler(message: any) {
const { body } = message;
const { data } = body;
const { eventType, trigger, triggerMeta } = data;
const { messageType } = message;
log.debug({ trigger: data.trigger });
const result: ResponsePayload = yield call(
executeTriggerRequestSaga,
trigger,
eventType,
triggerMeta,
);
if (messageType === MessageType.REQUEST)
yield call(evalWorker.respond, message.messageId, result);
}
export function* handleEvalWorkerMessage(message: TMessage<any>) {
const { body } = message;
const { data, method } = body;
switch (method) {
case MAIN_THREAD_ACTION.LINT_TREE: {
fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
yield call(lintTreeActionHandler, message);
break;
}
case MAIN_THREAD_ACTION.PROCESS_LOGS: {
fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
yield call(processLogsHandler, message);
break;
}
case MAIN_THREAD_ACTION.PROCESS_JS_FUNCTION_EXECUTION: {
fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
yield call(processJSFunctionExecution, message);
break;
}
case MAIN_THREAD_ACTION.PROCESS_TRIGGER: {
fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
yield call(processTriggerHandler, message);
break;
}
case MAIN_THREAD_ACTION.PROCESS_STORE_UPDATES: {
yield call(handleStoreOperations, data);
break;
}
case MAIN_THREAD_ACTION.LOG_JS_FUNCTION_EXECUTION: {
yield logJSFunctionExecution(message);
break;
}
fix: access outer scope variables inside callbacks (#20168) ## Description Any platform function that accepts a callback were unable to access the variables declared in its parent scopes. This was a implementation miss when we originally designed platform functions and again when we turned almost every platform function into a Promise. This PR fixes this limitation along with some other edge cases. - Access outer scope variables inside the callback of run, postMessage, setInterval, getGeoLocation and watchGeolocation functions. - Fixes certain edge cases where functions with callbacks when called inside the then block doesn't get executed. Eg `showAlert.then(() => /* Doesn't execute */ Api1.run(() => {}))` - Changes the implementation of all the platform function in appsmith to maintain the execution metadata (info on from where a function was invoked, event associated with it etc) #### Refactor changes - Added a new folder **_fns_** that would now hold all the platform functions. - Introduced a new ExecutionMetadata singleton class that is now responsible for hold all the meta data related to the current evaluation. - Remove TRIGGER_COLLECTOR array where all callback based platform functions were batched and introduced an Event Emitter based implementation to handle batched fn calls. - All callback based functions now emits event when invoked. These events have handlers attached to the TriggerEmitter object. These handler does the job of batching these invocations and telling the main thread. It also ensures that platform fn calls that gets triggered out the the context of a request/response cycle work. #### Architecture <img width="751" alt="Screenshot 2023-02-07 at 10 04 26" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/32433245/217259200-5eac71bc-f0d3-4d3c-9b69-2a8dc81351bc.png"> Fixes #13156 Fixes #20225 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? - Jest - Cypress - Manual ### Test Plan - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2181 - [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2182 - [ ] Post message - https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/post-msg-app/page1-635fcfba2987b442a739b938/edit - [ ] Apps: https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/earworm-1/home-630c9d85b4658d0f257c4987/edit - [ ] https://appsmith-git-chore-outer-scope-variable-access-get-appsmith.vercel.app/app/automation-test-cases/page-1-630c6b90d4ecd573f6bb01e9/edit#0hmn8m90ei ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reviewing all Cypress test
2023-02-11 18:33:20 +00:00
case MAIN_THREAD_ACTION.PROCESS_BATCHED_TRIGGERS: {
const batchedTriggers = data;
yield all(
batchedTriggers.map((data: any) => {
const { eventType, trigger, triggerMeta } = data;
return call(
executeTriggerRequestSaga,
trigger,
eventType,
triggerMeta,
);
}),
);
break;
}
}
yield call(evalErrorHandler, data?.errors || []);
}