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

338 lines
9.5 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Normal View History

import {
all,
call,
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
delay,
put,
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
select,
takeEvery,
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
takeLatest,
} from "redux-saga/effects";
import { generateReactKey } from "utils/generators";
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 { ModalWidgetResize, WidgetAddChild } from "actions/pageActions";
import { updateAndSaveLayout } from "actions/pageActions";
import {
GridDefaults,
MAIN_CONTAINER_WIDGET_ID,
} from "constants/WidgetConstants";
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 { ReduxAction } from "@appsmith/constants/ReduxActionConstants";
import {
ReduxActionErrorTypes,
ReduxActionTypes,
WidgetReduxActionTypes,
} from "@appsmith/constants/ReduxActionConstants";
import {
getWidget,
getWidgetByName,
getWidgetIdsByType,
getWidgetMetaProps,
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
getWidgets,
getWidgetsMeta,
} from "sagas/selectors";
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 {
CanvasWidgetsReduxState,
FlattenedWidgetProps,
} from "reducers/entityReducers/canvasWidgetsReducer";
import { updateWidgetMetaPropAndEval } from "actions/metaActions";
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
import { focusWidget, showModal } from "actions/widgetActions";
import log from "loglevel";
import { flatten } from "lodash";
chore: Move the widget config to widget class (#26073) ## Description - Remove the config objects from widget and config maps from the widget factory. - Introduce methods in widget development API to dynamically fetch this items. - freeze the widget configuration. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/26008 > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] 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: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [x] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [x] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-09-06 12:15:04 +00:00
import WidgetFactory from "WidgetProvider/factory";
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 { WidgetProps } from "widgets/BaseWidget";
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
import { selectWidgetInitAction } from "actions/widgetSelectionActions";
import { SelectionRequestType } from "./WidgetSelectUtils";
feat: [epic] appsmith design system version 2 deduplication (#22030) ## Description ### Fixes - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19383 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19384 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19385 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19386 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19387 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19388 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19389 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19390 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19391 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19392 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19393 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19394 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19395 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19396 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19397 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19398 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19399 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19400 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19401 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19402 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19403 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19404 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19405 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19406 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19407 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19408 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19409 Fixes # (issue) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video ## Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update ## How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions, so we can reproduce. > Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not important - 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: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: akash-codemonk <67054171+akash-codemonk@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Tanvi Bhakta <tanvi@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Arsalan <arsalanyaldram0211@outlook.com> Co-authored-by: Aman Agarwal <aman@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Rohit Agarwal <rohit_agarwal@live.in> Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <nilesh@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Tanvi Bhakta <tanvibhakta@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi Goswami <parthvigoswami@Parthvis-MacBook-Pro.local> Co-authored-by: Vijetha-Kaja <vijetha@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi <80334441+Parthvi12@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Apple <nandan@thinkify.io> Co-authored-by: Saroj <43822041+sarojsarab@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sangeeth Sivan <74818788+berzerkeer@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya-U-R <91450662+Aishwarya-U-R@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Preet Sidhu <preetsidhu.bits@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Vijetha-Kaja <119562824+Vijetha-Kaja@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Shrikant Sharat Kandula <shrikant@appsmith.com>
2023-05-19 18:37:06 +00:00
import { toast } from "design-system";
import { getIsAutoLayout } from "selectors/editorSelectors";
import { recalculateAutoLayoutColumnsAndSave } from "./AutoLayoutUpdateSagas";
import {
FlexLayerAlignment,
LayoutDirection,
chore: Create layout system structure for Anvil and AnvilFlexComponent. (#27178) ## Description 1. Add new ```appPositioningType``` : ANVIL. 2. Create new code path and folder structure for Anvil layout system. 3. Move common pieces of functionalities between autoLayout and anvil to anvil folder structure (e.g. ```CanvasResizer```). 4. Create ```AnvilFlexComponent```. 5. Use WDS Flex component in AnvilFlexComponent. 6. Pass min max size props in a data structure that is supported by container queries in the Flex component. e.g. min-width: { base: "120px", "480px": "200px" } 7. Supply the following flex properties (flex-grow flex-shrink flex-basis) to widgets depending on their ```responsiveBehvaiour```: a) Fill: ```flex: 1 1 0%;``` b) Hug: ```flex: 0 0 auto;``` #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) 1. [#26987](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/26987) 2. [#26609](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/26609) 3. [#26611](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/26611) #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [x] Jest - [ ] Cypress ## 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 - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] 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 - [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <71900764+rahulramesha@users.noreply.github.com>
2023-10-02 19:41:05 +00:00
} from "layoutSystems/common/utils/constants";
const WidgetTypes = WidgetFactory.widgetTypes;
2020-04-03 09:32:13 +00:00
export function* createModalSaga(action: ReduxAction<{ modalName: string }>) {
try {
const modalWidgetId = generateReactKey();
const isAutoLayout: boolean = yield select(getIsAutoLayout);
const newWidget: WidgetAddChild = {
widgetId: MAIN_CONTAINER_WIDGET_ID,
2020-04-03 09:32:13 +00:00
widgetName: action.payload.modalName,
type: WidgetTypes.MODAL_WIDGET,
newWidgetId: modalWidgetId,
parentRowSpace: 1,
parentColumnSpace: 1,
leftColumn: 0,
topRow: 0,
columns: 0,
rows: 0,
2020-04-15 11:42:11 +00:00
tabId: "",
};
if (isAutoLayout) {
const dropPayload = {
alignment: FlexLayerAlignment.Center,
index: 0,
isNewLayer: true,
layerIndex: 0,
rowIndex: 0,
};
newWidget.props = {
alignment: FlexLayerAlignment.Center,
};
yield put({
type: ReduxActionTypes.AUTOLAYOUT_ADD_NEW_WIDGETS,
payload: {
dropPayload,
newWidget,
parentId: MAIN_CONTAINER_WIDGET_ID,
direction: LayoutDirection.Vertical,
addToBottom: true,
},
});
} else {
yield put({
type: WidgetReduxActionTypes.WIDGET_ADD_CHILD,
payload: newWidget,
});
}
} catch (error) {
log.error(error);
yield put({
type: ReduxActionErrorTypes.CREATE_MODAL_ERROR,
payload: { error },
});
}
}
export function* showModalByNameSaga(
action: ReduxAction<{ modalName: string }>,
) {
const widgets: { [widgetId: string]: FlattenedWidgetProps } =
yield select(getWidgets);
const modal: FlattenedWidgetProps | undefined = Object.values(widgets).find(
(widget: FlattenedWidgetProps) =>
widget.widgetName === action.payload.modalName,
);
if (modal) {
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
yield put(showModal(modal.widgetId));
}
}
export function* showIfModalSaga(
action: ReduxAction<{ widgetId: string; type: string }>,
) {
if (action.payload.type === "MODAL_WIDGET") {
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
yield put(showModal(action.payload.widgetId));
}
}
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
export function* showModalSaga(action: ReduxAction<{ modalId: string }>) {
// First we close the currently open modals (if any)
// Notice the empty payload.
yield call(closeModalSaga, {
type: ReduxActionTypes.CLOSE_MODAL,
payload: {
exclude: action.payload.modalId,
},
});
2020-04-13 08:24:13 +00:00
yield put(focusWidget(action.payload.modalId));
feat: List V2 (#15839) ## Description TL;DR This is a complete architectural change of of List widget works to support all widgets we currently have and should automatically support any future widgets. It also introduces nested List widgets i.e a list widget can have a another list widget which in turn can have another list widget. Fixes #18206 Fixes #6775 Fixes #13211 Fixes #16582 Fixes #11739 Fixes #15094 Fixes #6840 Fixes #10841 Fixes #17386 Fixes #18340 Fixes #16898 Fixes #17555 Fixes #6858 Fixes #9568 Fixes #17480 Fixes #18523 Fixes #18206 Fixes #16586 Fixes #18106 Fixes #16576 Fixes #14697 Fixes #9607 Fixes #19648 Fixes #19739 Fixes #19652 Fixes #18730 Fixes #19503 Fixes #19498 Fixes #19437 Fixes #5245 Fixes #19150 Fixes #18638 Fixes #11332 Fixes #17901 Fixes #19043 Fixes #17777 Fixes #8237 Fixes #15487 Fixes #15988 Fixes #18621 Fixes #16788 Fixes #18110 Fixes #18382 Fixes #17427 Fixes #18105 Fixes #18287 Fixes #19808 Fixes #14655 ## Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Cypress - Jest - Manual ## Checklist: - [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 - [ ] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Tolulope Adetula <31691737+Tooluloope@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Favour Ohanekwu <fohanekwu@gmail.com>
2023-02-14 16:07:31 +00:00
const widgetLikeProps = {
widgetId: action.payload.modalId,
} as WidgetProps;
const metaProps: Record<string, unknown> = yield select(
getWidgetMetaProps,
feat: List V2 (#15839) ## Description TL;DR This is a complete architectural change of of List widget works to support all widgets we currently have and should automatically support any future widgets. It also introduces nested List widgets i.e a list widget can have a another list widget which in turn can have another list widget. Fixes #18206 Fixes #6775 Fixes #13211 Fixes #16582 Fixes #11739 Fixes #15094 Fixes #6840 Fixes #10841 Fixes #17386 Fixes #18340 Fixes #16898 Fixes #17555 Fixes #6858 Fixes #9568 Fixes #17480 Fixes #18523 Fixes #18206 Fixes #16586 Fixes #18106 Fixes #16576 Fixes #14697 Fixes #9607 Fixes #19648 Fixes #19739 Fixes #19652 Fixes #18730 Fixes #19503 Fixes #19498 Fixes #19437 Fixes #5245 Fixes #19150 Fixes #18638 Fixes #11332 Fixes #17901 Fixes #19043 Fixes #17777 Fixes #8237 Fixes #15487 Fixes #15988 Fixes #18621 Fixes #16788 Fixes #18110 Fixes #18382 Fixes #17427 Fixes #18105 Fixes #18287 Fixes #19808 Fixes #14655 ## Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Cypress - Jest - Manual ## Checklist: - [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 - [ ] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Tolulope Adetula <31691737+Tooluloope@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Favour Ohanekwu <fohanekwu@gmail.com>
2023-02-14 16:07:31 +00:00
widgetLikeProps,
);
if (!metaProps || !metaProps.isVisible) {
// Then show the modal we would like to show.
yield put(
updateWidgetMetaPropAndEval(action.payload.modalId, "isVisible", true),
);
yield delay(1000);
}
yield put({
type: ReduxActionTypes.SHOW_PROPERTY_PANE,
payload: {
widgetId: action.payload.modalId,
callForDragOrResize: undefined,
force: true,
},
});
}
export function* closeModalSaga(
action: ReduxAction<{ modalName?: string; exclude?: string }>,
) {
try {
const { modalName } = action.payload;
let widgetIds: string[] = [];
// If modalName is provided, we just want to close this modal
if (modalName) {
const widget: FlattenedWidgetProps | undefined = yield select(
getWidgetByName,
modalName,
);
widgetIds = widget ? [widget.widgetId] : [];
yield put({
type: ReduxActionTypes.SHOW_PROPERTY_PANE,
payload: {},
});
} else {
// If modalName is not provided, find all open modals
// Get all meta prop records
const metaProps: Record<string, any> = yield select(getWidgetsMeta);
// Get widgetIds of all widgets of type MODAL_WIDGET
const modalWidgetIds: string[] = yield select(
getWidgetIdsByType,
WidgetTypes.MODAL_WIDGET,
);
// Loop through all modal widgetIds
modalWidgetIds.forEach((widgetId: string) => {
// Check if modal is open
if (metaProps[widgetId] && metaProps[widgetId].isVisible) {
// Add to our list of widgetIds
widgetIds.push(widgetId);
}
});
}
widgetIds = action.payload.exclude
? widgetIds.filter((id: string) => id !== action.payload.exclude)
: widgetIds;
// If we have modals to close, set its isVisible to false to close.
if (widgetIds) {
yield all(
flatten(
widgetIds.map((widgetId: string) => {
return [
put(updateWidgetMetaPropAndEval(widgetId, "isVisible", false)),
];
}),
),
);
}
if (modalName) {
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643) ## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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
2023-01-28 02:17:06 +00:00
yield put(selectWidgetInitAction(SelectionRequestType.Empty));
yield put(focusWidget(MAIN_CONTAINER_WIDGET_ID));
}
} catch (error) {
log.error(error);
}
}
export function* resizeModalSaga(resizeAction: ReduxAction<ModalWidgetResize>) {
try {
feat: [epic] appsmith design system version 2 deduplication (#22030) ## Description ### Fixes - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19383 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19384 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19385 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19386 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19387 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19388 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19389 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19390 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19391 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19392 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19393 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19394 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19395 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19396 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19397 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19398 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19399 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19400 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19401 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19402 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19403 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19404 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19405 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19406 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19407 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19408 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19409 Fixes # (issue) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video ## Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update ## How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions, so we can reproduce. > Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not important - 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: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: akash-codemonk <67054171+akash-codemonk@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Tanvi Bhakta <tanvi@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Arsalan <arsalanyaldram0211@outlook.com> Co-authored-by: Aman Agarwal <aman@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Rohit Agarwal <rohit_agarwal@live.in> Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <nilesh@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Tanvi Bhakta <tanvibhakta@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi Goswami <parthvigoswami@Parthvis-MacBook-Pro.local> Co-authored-by: Vijetha-Kaja <vijetha@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi <80334441+Parthvi12@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Apple <nandan@thinkify.io> Co-authored-by: Saroj <43822041+sarojsarab@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sangeeth Sivan <74818788+berzerkeer@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya-U-R <91450662+Aishwarya-U-R@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Preet Sidhu <preetsidhu.bits@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Vijetha-Kaja <119562824+Vijetha-Kaja@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Shrikant Sharat Kandula <shrikant@appsmith.com>
2023-05-19 18:37:06 +00:00
toast.dismiss();
const start = performance.now();
const { canvasWidgetId, height, widgetId, width } = resizeAction.payload;
const stateWidget: FlattenedWidgetProps = yield select(getWidget, widgetId);
const stateWidgets: CanvasWidgetsReduxState = yield select(getWidgets);
const isAutoLayout: boolean = yield select(getIsAutoLayout);
let widget = { ...stateWidget };
const widgets = { ...stateWidgets };
widget = { ...widget, height, width };
widgets[widgetId] = widget;
if (canvasWidgetId) {
const bottomRow = getModalCanvasBottomRow(
widgets,
canvasWidgetId,
height,
);
const stateModalContainerWidget: FlattenedWidgetProps = yield select(
getWidget,
canvasWidgetId,
);
let modalContainerWidget = { ...stateModalContainerWidget };
modalContainerWidget = {
...modalContainerWidget,
bottomRow,
minHeight: height,
};
widgets[canvasWidgetId] = modalContainerWidget;
}
log.debug("resize computations took", performance.now() - start, "ms");
perf: Widget re-rendering refactor (#14485) * initial commit * props hoc * changes * removed ignores and withWidgetProps * added extra props to canvasStructure * widget props changes * list widget changes * reintroduced widget props hook and other refactors * remove warnings * added deepequal for childWidgets selector * fix global hotkeys and tabs widget jest test * fix main container test fix * fixed view mode width * fix form widget values * minor fix * fix skeleton * form widget validity fix * jest test fix * fixed tests: GlobalHotkeys, Tabs, CanvasSelectectionArena and fixed main container rendering * minor fix * minor comments * reverted commented code * simplified structure, selective redux state updates and other inconsistencies * fix junit test cases * stop form widget from force rendering children * fix test case * random commit to re run tests * update isFormValid prop only if it exists * detangling circular dependency * fixing cypress tests * cleaned up code * clean up man cnavas props and fix jest cases * fix rendering order of child widgets for canvas * fix dropdown reset spec * adding comments * cleaning up unwanted code * fix multiselect widget on deploy * adressing review comments * addressing minor review comment changes * destructuring modal widget child and fix test case * fix communityIssues cypress spec * rewrite isVisible logic to match previous behaviour * merging widget props with component props before checking isVisible * adressing review comments for modal widget's isVisible Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com>
2022-08-19 10:10:36 +00:00
//TODO Identify the updated widgets and pass the values
if (isAutoLayout) {
yield call(recalculateAutoLayoutColumnsAndSave, widgets);
fix: Auto dimension not working within Modal widget (#23724) ## Description - Auto dimension within Modal widget was not working after resizing modal widget since we were not triggering PROCESS_AUTO_LAYOUT_DIMENSION_UPDATES after resizing modal widget. - Auto dimension induced height changes were not getting updated for the modal widget since we were only considering position properties and not "height" property for the auto-dimension updates #### PR fixes following issues Fixes #23658 Fixes #23714 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] 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: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
2023-06-01 03:39:23 +00:00
yield put({
type: ReduxActionTypes.PROCESS_AUTO_LAYOUT_DIMENSION_UPDATES,
});
} else {
yield put(updateAndSaveLayout(widgets));
}
} catch (error) {
yield put({
type: ReduxActionErrorTypes.WIDGET_OPERATION_ERROR,
payload: {
action: WidgetReduxActionTypes.WIDGET_RESIZE,
error,
},
});
}
}
/**
* Note: returns bottomRow of the lowest widget on the canvas
* @param finalWidgets
* @param parentId
* @param height
*/
const getModalCanvasBottomRow = (
finalWidgets: CanvasWidgetsReduxState,
parentId: string,
height: number,
): number => {
if (
!finalWidgets[parentId] ||
finalWidgets[parentId].type !== WidgetTypes.CANVAS_WIDGET
) {
return height;
}
const lowestBottomRowHeight =
height -
GridDefaults.CANVAS_EXTENSION_OFFSET *
GridDefaults.DEFAULT_GRID_ROW_HEIGHT -
GridDefaults.DEFAULT_GRID_ROW_HEIGHT;
let lowestBottomRow = Math.ceil(
lowestBottomRowHeight / GridDefaults.DEFAULT_GRID_ROW_HEIGHT,
);
const childIds = finalWidgets[parentId].children || [];
// find lowest row
childIds.forEach((cId: string) => {
const child = finalWidgets[cId];
if (child.bottomRow > lowestBottomRow) {
lowestBottomRow = child.bottomRow;
}
});
return (
(lowestBottomRow + GridDefaults.CANVAS_EXTENSION_OFFSET) *
GridDefaults.DEFAULT_GRID_ROW_HEIGHT
);
};
export default function* modalSagas() {
yield all([
takeEvery(ReduxActionTypes.CLOSE_MODAL, closeModalSaga),
takeLatest(ReduxActionTypes.CREATE_MODAL_INIT, createModalSaga),
takeLatest(ReduxActionTypes.SHOW_MODAL, showModalSaga),
takeLatest(ReduxActionTypes.SHOW_MODAL_BY_NAME, showModalByNameSaga),
takeLatest(WidgetReduxActionTypes.WIDGET_CHILD_ADDED, showIfModalSaga),
takeLatest(WidgetReduxActionTypes.WIDGET_MODAL_RESIZE, resizeModalSaga),
]);
}