Commit Graph

13 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
arunvjn
25477fa10d
chore: fix imports to resolve EE conflicts (#20576)
Changes imports - workers/Evaluation/fns to
@appsmith/workers/Evaluation/fns
2023-02-13 09:19:20 +05:30
arunvjn
091dcab60d
chore: Add missing imports errors for ee repo sync (#20575) 2023-02-12 05:15:34 +01:00
arunvjn
1d9d5bb197
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
2023-02-12 00:03:20 +05:30
Favour Ohanekwu
b38f08de01
fix: Refactor dataTree diff translation (#20180)
## Description

### Cause of issue
During the translation of dataTree diff, a change from an `Array` to `undefined`, was interpreted as a **delete event**. This causes the path to be deleted from the dependencyMap, hence doesn't ever show up in the evaluation order.

### Solution
A change from an Array or Object to undefined is translated to 

1. Deletion of all Array accessor paths 
2. Edit of propertyPath


### Example

Multiselect1.selectedOptions changes from ["Red", "Green"] to **undefined**. This translates to

1. Delete event for Multiselect1.selectedOptions[0] &  Multiselect1.selectedOptions[1] 
2. Edit event for Multiselect1.selectedOptions



Fixes #20428 

## Type of change

- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)


## 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>
2023-02-07 17:30:06 +05:30
Rishabh Rathod
cd051ac941
fix: Make async evaluation as default (#20095)
## Description

Current evaluation architecture has 2 natures of evaluation
- sync evaluation ( evaluation for data fields )
- async evaluation ( evaluation for trigger events )

For every evaluation, this nature needs to be set according to the field
being evaluated.
It was noticed that for async code evaluation where a code block
executes only after the resolution of promise, for example,

`fetch().then((res) => { showAlert("fetched") });`

Here, the `showAlert` only executes when the fetch is completed and
before that, it could be possible that we have switched to sync
evaluation in the worker. This would lead to a `showAlert` throwing
error.

Hence, we resolve this issue by making `async evaluation` as the default
nature of evaluation.

Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19733

## Type of change


- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)


## How Has This Been Tested?


- Manual
1. Validated Supabse app to check the error and JSPDF 
2. Validated sync data field with sync function and framework function -
verify that error for async function is displayed properly
3. Validated older apps(Automation app/Silly string) to verify the Async
error is not displayed
4. .then and catch block in async function - 

- Jest
- Cypress

### Test Plan

### Issues raised during DP testing


---------

Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com>
2023-01-30 10:57:12 +05:30
Rishabh Rathod
ea5a397f50
chore: Refactor for JSFunction execution auditLogs (#19671)
## Description

As auditLog related Code refactor for EE auditLog changes.

- Moving evalWorkerActionSaga to new file
- Created JSFunctionExecutionSaga & postJSFunctionExecutionLog
   - logic for the functionality of it would be added in EE.
- Made required changes in the JSProxy file to send functionName as a
parameter.
## Type of change

Code refactor


## How Has This Been Tested?

- Manual
- 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
- [ ] 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
- [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 reveiwing all Cypress test
2023-01-16 17:26:18 +05:30
Favour Ohanekwu
5231d307b8
feat: meta rehydration (#19683)
The introduction of MetaWidgets in
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/15839 introduces a scenario
where widgets are newly added to the unevalTree but already have defined
meta values. These previously defined meta values have higher priority
and should not get overridden by default values.

Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/16926


## Type of change

- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)


## 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
2023-01-13 23:59:03 +05:30
arunvjn
c8063743a2
fix: Batch operations on appsmith store for performance gains (#19247) 2023-01-10 10:23:08 +05:30
Anand Srinivasan
066f4566f2
chore: Platform functions extension for EE (#19575)
Related to #15538

To enable adding a new action only for EE.

- Moved `PLATFORM_FUNCTIONS` and related types
- Moved `NavigationSagas` and added payload type to use in EE
2023-01-10 05:55:39 +05:30
Rishabh Rathod
563468af69
chore: code refactor for jsFunction audit log (#19297)
## Description

code refactor for jsFunction audit log 

This is PR to support the changes in
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/941/files


## Type of change

chore


## How Has This Been Tested?

- Manual
- Jest
- Cypress

### Test Plan

No test plan required.

### 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: Ohans <fohanekwu@gmail.com>
2023-01-09 13:34:53 +05:30
Anand Srinivasan
be6a96e760
chore: ee clean up (#19475)
Related to #15538

To enable adding a new action only for EE.

Refactored `ActionTriggerType` enum to a union type.
So we can extend this with a new action in EE repo.

Made sure type discrimination is handled in `ActionExecutionSaga`
properly as before.

---

- Introduced `ActionTriggerKeys` union type which can be used for type
checking the values.
- Refactored `ActionDescription` types to accommodate usage of the union
type instead of enum.
- exported required types for usage in EE repo.

---

strings and payload are type checked as follows.


![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/66776129/210963548-46a9a368-653a-428d-bb08-94073d2c42dc.png)


![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/66776129/210963576-6d87ccad-6b0f-443c-9d03-aa9ee9f5103a.png)

Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com>
2023-01-06 17:32:08 +05:30
Rishabh Rathod
6b751d914e
fix: improve error message and performance in JS functions (#19137)
## Description


- Added logic to replace async function undefined error with
"{{actionName}} cannot be used in this field".
- This change improves performance for 
  - ParseJSActions
  - Triggers execution
  - Each Appsmith framework action execution.
- This change adds all platform functions to evalContext permanently.

Fixes #12179
Fixes #13273

Internal discussion for error message :-
https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/C02K0SZQ7V3/p1667457021297869?thread_ts=1667385039.225229&cid=C02K0SZQ7V3

## Type of change

- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- Performance improvement


## How Has This Been Tested?

- Manual
- Jest
- Cypress

### Test Plan

- [ ] https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2086

### 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>
2022-12-23 15:34:39 +05:30
Anand Srinivasan
db38a64e71
chore: update imports for code split (#19085)
* move actionTriggers.ts

* update imports Explorer/helpers.tsx

* update imports EntityDefinitions.ts

* update imports Evaluation/Actions.ts

* update imports for ActionExecutionSagas

* missed worker types

* missed imports

* update imports for dataTreeUtils

* missed imports

Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com>
2022-12-22 12:04:28 +05:30