Skip to content
New issue

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

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

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Migrate E/App to use PlatformStackNavigation #49937

Open
wants to merge 39 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

chrispader
Copy link
Contributor

@chrispader chrispader commented Sep 30, 2024

@mountiny @ishpaul777 @chiragsalian

Details

This PR migrates the App to use PlatformStackNavigation types and navigator components implemented in #37891

Fixed Issues

$ #37891
PROPOSAL: #37891 (comment)

Tests

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop

@chrispader chrispader requested a review from a team as a code owner September 30, 2024 14:32
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from srikarparsi and removed request for a team September 30, 2024 14:32
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Sep 30, 2024

@srikarparsi Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

@chrispader chrispader changed the title [WIP] Use PlatformStackNavigation in E/App (introduce native-stack navigation on native) [WIP] Use PlatformStackNavigation in E/App (introduce native-stack navigation on mobile) Sep 30, 2024
@chrispader chrispader changed the title [WIP] Use PlatformStackNavigation in E/App (introduce native-stack navigation on mobile) [WIP] Migrate E/App to use PlatformStackNavigation Sep 30, 2024
@chrispader chrispader changed the title [WIP] Migrate E/App to use PlatformStackNavigation [HOLD on #37891] Migrate E/App to use PlatformStackNavigation Sep 30, 2024
@chrispader chrispader force-pushed the @chrispader/use-platform-stack-navigation-in-app branch from 3b921d3 to 5701c46 Compare September 30, 2024 16:30
@srikarparsi
Copy link
Contributor

Re-assigning to @chiragsalian and @mountiny for review since it looks like they have more context.

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mountiny or @chiragsalian please from now on create ad-hoc builds from here. I fixed all remaining reported errors yesterday, so we can probably trigger a new build already.

This comment has been minimized.

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

The ad-hoc iOS build fail is also going to be related to the patch from #49936

@ishpaul777
Copy link
Contributor

@mountiny Please run adhoc builds here when you have a moment, i plan to work on testing this fully today

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Oct 3, 2024

Running

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2024

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, Desktop, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪

Android 🤖 iOS 🍎
❌ FAILED ❌ ❌ FAILED ❌
The QR code can't be generated, because the android build failed The QR code can't be generated, because the iOS build failed
Desktop 💻 Web 🕸️
❌ FAILED ❌ https://49937.pr-testing.expensify.com
The QR code can't be generated, because the Desktop build failed Web

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mountiny Please run adhoc builds here when you have a moment, i plan to work on testing this fully today

The PR didn't have the changes to the react-native-vision-camera patches up until now. Please trigger another set of ad-hoc builds :)

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Oct 4, 2024

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 4, 2024

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Oct 4, 2024

Bug on the workspace page
IMG_6525

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Oct 4, 2024

@chrispader Looking great! I think there are two things I have noticed:

  1. There is a noticeable delay of idk 0.5s after clicking on the chat row for the animation to start
  2. The chat finder modal is opening from the bottom, we want to keep the same animation we have now in main - animating from left

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

commenting so this shows on my k2 for easy access

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

chrispader commented Oct 6, 2024

Bug on the workspace page

@chrispader Looking great! I think there are two things I have noticed:

  1. There is a noticeable delay of idk 0.5s after clicking on the chat row for the animation to start
  2. The chat finder modal is opening from the bottom, we want to keep the same animation we have now in main - animating from left

@mountiny Both bugs are fixed!

I couldn't really see a difference between Stack navigator and Native-Stack while testing in this PR: (you meant when clicking on an item in the Sidebar right?)

Stack

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.-.2024-10-06.at.17.38.30.mp4

Native Stack

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.-.2024-10-06.at.20.09.51.mp4

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

I will be OOO the next week, but i will hand this over to one of our other Margelo engineers. If there are any urgent issues i can also help with that, but i'm not gonna be on my Macbook unfortunately

@ishpaul777
Copy link
Contributor

ishpaul777 commented Oct 6, 2024

I am now available for around ~2 hours i'll pull and start testing this locally

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

chrispader commented Oct 30, 2024

Just found the reason for the white flash in dark mode and dark flash in light mode. For some reason the SafeArea component only on iOS used themeColors.inverse in styles.iPhoneXSafeArea. I think this is either a mistake or a relic from some old code.

I fixed the background color, but i still think the current going back animation is not optimal. The screen content should stay rendered until the screen is unmounted:

Light theme Dark theme
Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.16.Pro.-.2024-10-30.at.20.01.53.mp4
Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.16.Pro.-.2024-10-30.at.20.01.27.mp4

@chrispader chrispader requested a review from a team as a code owner October 30, 2024 19:12
@dannymcclain
Copy link
Contributor

i still think the current going back animation is not optimal. The screen should stay rendered until the screen is unmounted

Definitely agree. That 1 second of blankness is scary haha.

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

chrispader commented Oct 30, 2024

i still think the current going back animation is not optimal. The screen should stay rendered until the screen is unmounted

Definitely agree. That 1 second of blankness is scary haha.

Yea, UX-wise not really nice... The problem is mostly about how we display modals on top of multiple screens. We want to be able to display any modal outside of the screens, so that they can continue rendering and animating out of the viewport, while the underlying screen is unmounting.

I'm working on a solution to get the same/similar behaviour as on main:

Animation In detail
ScreenRecording_10-30-2024.20-57-13_1.MP4
Screen.Recording.2024-10-30.at.21.23.32.mov

@ishpaul777
Copy link
Contributor

@chrispader Ping me when this ready for testing again

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Nov 1, 2024

Thanks for digging, we are getting there 🤞

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

chrispader commented Nov 1, 2024

cc @mountiny @ishpaul777

Ok so here's broader overview of the problem with modals under @react-navigation/native-stack:

I created a simple reproducer repo using the same environment as in E/App in this PR. (RN 0.75.2, NativeStack, RNModal, etc.)

The flow i was testing is the following: The user clicks on the "Confirm delete" button inside a modal in a nested screen. Once the button is clicked, that modal (react-native-modal) will be dismissed while simultaneously the screen gets dismissed (navigation.goBack()).

I tested whether the flicker/content disappearing during the screen unmount animation only occurs on new arch or also old arch. Additionally i tested the same flow with modal screens from @react-navigation instead of react-native-modal component.

I can now verify, that the screen content disappears only under new architecture. I'm now also pretty certain, that this must be caused by react-native-screens, since it also happens with modal screens rather than the RN modal component.

These videos show the results of my testing (to see the issue in detail, you might want to slowly go through the video manually)

react-native-modal component:

Old arch New arch
RNModal.old.arch.mp4
RNModal.new.arch.mp4

@react-navigation modal screens:

Old arch New arch
ModalScreen.old.arch.mp4
ModalScreen.new.arch.mp4

Also tagging @WoLewicki and @satya164 here, since you might have a better understanding of the (native) cause of this issue under new architecture :)

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

We can already see the problem with react-native-modal components in use cases where the screen is dismissed at the same time as the modal.

My general suggestion would be to completely ditch react-native-modal and instead use modal screens and react-native-bottom-sheet for the most part of the app, but that would mean re-structuring a lot of code.

Also the way forward with modal libraries has been discussed recently in this thread, and i think we decided on keeping react-native-modal and continue maintaining it ourselves...

A fix for the issue in the context of this PR would be to replace only the modals in screens that are currently affected by this simultaneous dismissal of screen and modal. E.g.

  • TagSettingsPage.tsx
  • CategorySettingsPage.tsx
  • (we would need to identify all other potentially problematic screens)

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

cc @mountiny @ishpaul777

Ok so here's broader overview of the problem with modals under @react-navigation/native-stack:
...
I can now verify, that the screen content disappears only under new architecture. I'm now also pretty certain, that this must be caused by react-native-screens, since it also happens with modal screens rather than the RN modal component.

Also tagging @WoLewicki and @satya164 here, since you might have a better understanding of the (native) cause of this issue under new architecture :)

@WoLewicki @satya164 do you guys know what could be causing this issue natively (on new arch)? I feel like this is a more low-level issue, since the screen content disappearing is also easily reproduible in a simple repro app.

@ishpaul777
Copy link
Contributor

ishpaul777 commented Nov 4, 2024

Started a thread on slack to have a real time conversation https://expensify.enterprise.slack.com/archives/C01GTK53T8Q/p1730730136540929

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Nov 4, 2024

Thanks, bumped the thread

@WoLewicki
Copy link
Contributor

Ok I think I got to the root of the issue. It consists of 2 things.

  • First is that we still have unnecessary logic in react-native-screens concerning creating a snapshot of view on navigating back from a screen. After a patch I got it working 🚀. It fixes the problem when having modals from react-native-screens.
  • Second one is tougher. We have a modal from react-native-modal that is not controlled by react-native-screens so we don't know that we should make a snapshot of it when we dismiss the whole screen. I will try and investigate it if we can handle it anyhow but looks tricky 😕

@chrispader
Copy link
Contributor Author

chrispader commented Nov 5, 2024

First is that we still have unnecessary logic in react-native-screens concerning creating a snapshot of view on navigating back from a screen. After a patch I got it working 🚀. It fixes the problem when having modals from react-native-screens.

@WoLewicki Amazing, thanks for fixing this! 🚀❤️

Second one is tougher. We have a modal from react-native-modal that is not controlled by react-native-screens so we don't know that we should make a snapshot of it when we dismiss the whole screen. I will try and investigate it if we can handle it anyhow but looks tricky 😕

I thought this one might be tricker. I think the optimal solution would be to use modal screens (presentation: 'transparentModal') from react-navigation anyway, but if it's possible to make this work with react-native-modal as well, that would be awesome.

@mountiny if it's not possible to make the second issue work, i think we might have to adapt the modal change in a separate PR - at least if we want migrate consistently for the whole app.

We could also just switch to modal screens for the screens that are currently affected by this problem (only modals that get dismissed at the same time as the screen)

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Nov 6, 2024

I agree let's just explore this for a bit but we can look into this in a follow up if its too complex

@WoLewicki
Copy link
Contributor

After testing and thinking about it a little more, I think the problem is kinda impossible to solve in sensible way with new architecture. Navigating back just removes one of Screen components from React view hierarchy. There are a few key points to that:

  1. That action is interpreted in native stack as a dismissal of modal or normal screen, the snapshot of the current view hierarchy is made (otherwise we would animate empty screen since there are no react views there now) and the going back animation is carried out on that snapshot: https://github.com/software-mansion/react-native-screens/blob/960873aa03b9e22136d2f7b3b272e407011568d2/ios/RNSScreen.mm#L1833-L1843.
  2. Pure Modal component from react-native does something similar to react-native-screens. When it sees that the component has been removed on the native side, it makes the snapshot and removes the view with native animation if it was specified.
  3. react-native-modal is not using the native iOS transitions for showing/dismissing the modal and it is the biggest problem of it. It pushes/dismisses the modal without animation and uses Animated under the hood to animate the views: https://github.com/react-native-modal/react-native-modal/blob/6624b5abb326470820f9fedec8b3ecdb35520869/src/modal.tsx#L834. Because of this, when we navigate back, the react views are dropped, there is no native animation specified and the modal just disappears immediately.

Because of all of this, there is simply no way to have the animation of modal from react-native-modal hiding when navigating back, and it can also be seen on old arch. We could theoretically try and animate the modal as swiping to the right same as the screen below, but it is problematic also, since modal is bigger than the screen when having native header in that screen underneath (it is so because the header is not part of the screen and it does not take part in the go back animation). It would probably work in Expensify since we don't use the native header here but I am not sure if it is what users would expect either way.

The possible solutions I see is either not using react-native-modal library, or, what's probably easier, wait till the modal hides and then do the navigation on onModalHide callback, which seems the natural way of how it should be done. I might be missing something though.

Copy link
Contributor

@kirillzyusko kirillzyusko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A new release of react-native-screens was just released: https://github.com/software-mansion/react-native-screens/releases/tag/4.0.0

I'll leave comments which patches can be removed after upgrade (@chrispader I think it would be good to update now and remove patches?)

This patch is not present in this PR, but also can be removed: https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/main/patches/react-native-screens%2B3.34.0%2B002%2Bios_from_left_animation.patch

startTransitionRecursive(child.toolbar)
}
if (child is ViewGroup) {
+ // a combination of https://github.com/software-mansion/react-native-screens/pull/2307/files and https://github.com/software-mansion/react-native-screens/pull/2383/files
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This patch can be removed if we switch to RNS 4.0

-static const float RNSSlideCloseTransitionDurationProportion = 0.25 / 0.35;
-static const float RNSFadeCloseTransitionDurationProportion = 0.15 / 0.35;
-static const float RNSFadeCloseDelayTransitionDurationProportion = 0.1 / 0.35;
+static const float RNSFadeOpenTransitionDurationProportion = 0.2 / 0.5;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This patch can be removed if we switch to RNS 4.0

simple_push animation curve transition has been fixed, so this patch is not needed anymore

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Nov 7, 2024

Thanks for looking into this, i think we will try not to hold on this and get this merged. Lets do a final check over, update the screens version and remove patches - then merge main and i will make a new build and test it some. Also lets verify one last time after those changes it works in hybrid app (and no specific changes are required there) and we can ship it

@WoLewicki
Copy link
Contributor

Are you sure you want to bump react-native-screens to v4? Officially it only supports @react-navigation v7: https://github.com/software-mansion/react-native-screens#usage-with-react-navigation. Wouldn't you want to do it in separate PR? There are many many things that come with that new version so it sounds pretty reasonable to do it in a follow-up PR. Or am I missing something here?

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor

Are you sure you want to bump react-native-screens to v4? Officially it only supports @react-navigation v7: https://github.com/software-mansion/react-native-screens#usage-with-react-navigation. Wouldn't you want to do it in separate PR? There are many many things that come with that new version so it sounds pretty reasonable to do it in a follow-up PR. Or am I missing something here?

Oh, then you are probably right - I didn't know v4 is compatible only with react-navigation v7. Then it definitely makes sense to handle it in a follow up PR 👀

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Nov 7, 2024

+1 actually, this will be better to handle in a separate PR as this is already quite large

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants