fix: enable connect on cashout page + minor UX QoL improvments #429
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
📝 Walkthrough📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe pull request modifies several components, including Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
nezz0746
force-pushed
the
fix/remove-refund-option-on-request
branch
2 times, most recently
from
dfa1e5f to
cc90cc5
Compare
| _setTokenValue('0') | ||
| } | ||
| }, []) | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Setting 0 preprends user input with 0, which differs from the behavior from other inputs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah this was a bad hack by me in a previous PR - also bad that it fell through in PR review ^^
praise: nice commenting the code on github and reason for removal
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- src/components/Cashout/Components/Initial.view.tsx (0 hunks)
- src/components/Profile/Components/MobileTableComponent.tsx (1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- src/components/Cashout/Components/Initial.view.tsx
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/components/Profile/Components/MobileTableComponent.tsx (1)
99-99: Confirm the conditional logic aligns with business requirementsThe updated condition now displays the "Refund" button when
dashboardItem.typeis anything except'Request Link'and the status is'pending'. Ensure this change aligns with the intended business logic, especially if there are other types where the "Refund" option should be excluded.Run the following script to list all unique
dashboardItem.typevalues used in the codebase to verify that all relevant types are considered:This will help ensure that no other types need to be accounted for in the conditional logic.
✅ Verification successful
Conditional logic correctly aligns with business requirements
All relevant
dashboardItem.typevalues have been accounted for, ensuring the "Refund" button behaves as intended.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: List all unique dashboardItem.type values used in equality comparisons. # Expected result: A list of all unique types compared in the codebase. rg --type typescript -o "dashboardItem\.type\s*===\s*'[^']+'" | sed -E "s/.*===\s*'([^']+)'.*/\1/" | sort | uniqLength of output: 167
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: List all unique dashboardItem.type values used in equality comparisons from TypeScript files. # Searching for both .ts and .tsx files rg --type ts -o "dashboardItem\.type\s*===\s*'[^']+'" \ --type tsx -o "dashboardItem\.type\s*===\s*'[^']+'" | \ sed -E "s/.*===\s*'([^']+)'.*/\1/" | sort | uniqLength of output: 213
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: List all unique dashboardItem.type values used in equality comparisons from TypeScript files. # Searching for .ts and .tsx files using glob patterns rg -g '*.ts' -g '*.tsx' -o "dashboardItem\.type\s*===\s*'[^']+'" | \ sed -E "s/.*===\s*'([^']+)'.*/\1/" | sort | uniqLength of output: 158
nezz0746
changed the title
| _setTokenValue('0') | ||
| } | ||
| }, []) | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah this was a bad hack by me in a previous PR - also bad that it fell through in PR review ^^
praise: nice commenting the code on github and reason for removal
| const RecentRecipients = ({ recentRecipients, onClick, isLoading }: RecentRecipientsProps) => { | ||
| if (isLoading) { | ||
| return ( | ||
| <div className="flex w-full flex-col items-start justify-center gap-2"> | ||
| <label className="text-h7 font-bold text-gray-2">Recents</label> | ||
| {[0, 1, 2].map((idx) => ( | ||
| <div | ||
| key={idx} | ||
| className="flex h-10 w-full flex-row items-center justify-between border border-n-1 p-2 transition-colors hover:bg-n-3/10" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Praise: appreciate moving Recent recipients into its own component. Way better.
nezz0746
force-pushed
the
fix/remove-refund-option-on-request
branch
from
92c2890 to
ea6e7b7
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
src/components/Create/Components/RecentRecipients.tsx (2)
10-32: LGTM: Well-implemented loading state with skeleton UI.The component structure and loading state handling follow React best practices. The skeleton UI provides a good user experience during loading.
Consider extracting the skeleton UI into a separate component for better code organization, especially if it's reused elsewhere in the application.
34-60: LGTM: Clear and efficient rendering logic.The component's main rendering logic is well-implemented, with proper use of React patterns and attention to user experience details like address truncation and singular/plural handling.
Consider adding an
aria-labelto the clickable div for better accessibility. For example:<div key={recipient.address} className="flex h-10 w-full cursor-pointer flex-row items-center justify-between border border-n-1 p-2 transition-colors hover:bg-n-3/10" onClick={() => onClick(recipient.address)} + aria-label={`Select recipient ${utils.shortenAddressLong(recipient.address, 6)}`} >
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
- src/components/Cashout/Components/Initial.view.tsx (1 hunks)
- src/components/Create/Components/RecentRecipients.tsx (1 hunks)
- src/components/Create/Link/Initial.view.tsx (1 hunks)
- src/components/Profile/Components/MobileTableComponent.tsx (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
- src/components/Cashout/Components/Initial.view.tsx
- src/components/Profile/Components/MobileTableComponent.tsx
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (5)
src/components/Create/Components/RecentRecipients.tsx (3)
1-8: LGTM: Well-structured imports and type definition.The imports are appropriate, and the
RecentRecipientsPropstype is well-defined, enhancing code readability and type safety.
63-63: LGTM: Proper component export.The default export of the
RecentRecipientscomponent is correctly implemented.
1-63: Great job on the RecentRecipients component!This new component is well-structured, follows React best practices, and effectively handles both loading and loaded states. The code is readable, maintainable, and provides a good user experience.
As mentioned in a previous review, moving Recent recipients into its own component is indeed a great improvement to the codebase structure.
src/components/Create/Link/Initial.view.tsx (2)
Line range hint
198-220: Improved readability in search results rendering logic.The change from a nested ternary operator to a simple conditional check enhances code readability and maintainability. This modification simplifies the logic while maintaining the same functionality of displaying search results only when there's input.
Line range hint
1-240: Consider the impact of removing the recent recipients feature.The removal of the recent recipients section, as mentioned in the AI-generated summary, could potentially impact user experience. This feature likely provided quick access to frequently used recipients, which can be convenient for users.
Questions to consider:
- Was this feature underutilized, justifying its removal?
- Are there plans to implement this functionality differently elsewhere?
- How might this change affect users who relied on the recent recipients feature?
It might be beneficial to gather usage data or user feedback to ensure this change aligns with user needs and expectations.
To confirm the removal and its potential impact, let's check for any remaining references to
recentRecipients:If the feature was valuable but removed due to performance or maintenance concerns, consider alternative implementations such as caching recent recipients or moving the functionality to a separate, optimized component.
No description provided.