Previously, if you tried to invite a user whose account had been
deactivated, we didn't provide a clear path forward for reactivating
the users, which was confusing.
We fix this by plumbing through to the frontend the information that
there is an existing user account with that email address in this
organization, but that it's deactivated. For administrators, we
provide a link for how to reactivate the user.
Fixes#8144.
The sort_recipients helper is used for many different
typeaheads, such as compose PMs, compose mentions,
and some settings-related code.
We now avoid unnecessary sorting steps in cases
where we have plenty of results in the top buckets
(such as users who match on prefix).
This change should not have any user-facing
implications.
This method is a bit complex, but I think it's
worthwhile to force PM autocompletes and mention
autocompletes through the same code path.
We also kill off this method:
typeahead_helper.sort_people_and_user_groups
For historical reasons pm_list was handling just
one possible edge case of where is:private was
combined with other search terms, namely the
pm-with operator.
The code was correct in realizing the is:private
was redundant there, but now we handle that
upstream in Filter.fix_operators (see previous
commit).
Now we just look for any is:private term.
This change makes these two functions more alike:
- get_search_result
- get_search_result_legacy
To test the UI modify zerver/views/home.py by
replacing `settings.SEARCH_PILLS_ENABLED` with
`True`. I only did a quick sanity check, since
any bugs with the new system are more likely due
to bitrot than any changes I have made here.
The history is this:
Tim cloned the code (before the smaller
helpers were extracted):
db4f6e278f
In 8b153f6452
Shubham removed get_operator_subset_suggestions but
accidentally left a `concat` statement in that got
misapplied to the previous suggestions:
- suggestions = get_operator_subset_suggestions(operators);
result = result.concat(suggestions);
The error there was carried over in some recent changes,
but this commit fixes that strangeness.
In 73e4f3b3fa
Shubham made this change, which makes sense only for
pills, and this code remains intact.
- if (operators.length > 0) {
- last = operators.slice(-1)[0];
+ if (query_operators.length > 0) {
+ last = query_operators.slice(-1)[0];
+ } else {
+ // If query_operators = [] then last will remain
+ // {operator: '', operand: '', negated: false}; from above.
+ // `last` has not yet been added to operators/query_operators.
+ // The code below adds last to operators/query_operators
+ operators.push(last);
+ query_operators.push(last);
}
Mohit made a couple changes to both old and new.
Anders made a couple non-substantive changes related to
the ES6 migration.
Steve (me) made several structural changes to the code. For
some of them I only changed the legacy code, not the pills
code. I didn't fix Shubham's mistake until this change.
Now the two functions should look similar except in the places
where they are intentionally different. I also added a comment
explaining the get_operator_subset_suggestions difference.
Fixes#13609
I want to be able to easily test this without
having to simulate all the jQuery side effects.
This simply preserves the old logic, which seems
to handle one edge case without handling every
possible edge case. The edge cases aren't super
important here, though, since the only thing it affects
is bolding "Private Messages", and when to do that
is somewhat up to personal tastes.
Having said that, we could definitely improve
this code and possibly should move some of this
logic to either narrow_state.js or filter.js.
Instead of doing various ad-hoc calculations of
which PM is "active" and plumbing it through various
functions and then updating it via jQuery instead of
just the template, we now just calculate `is_active`
in `_build_private_messages_list` with a little
helper function.
This test mostly tests logic that I'm about
to remove in subsequent commits, and it's a bit
messy.
This commit removes 100% line coverage, but I
will restore that a few commits later.
In 3cfc3ca24b I removed
the feature that limited PM conversations to five or
less (including the active conversation), but I
didn't clean up this parameter. I think lint was
confused by the fact that we did mutate it.
I am wondering if this started out as an experiment
and was never fully polished before the push? Or
maybe I was just careless. Anyway, I don't
think were any symptoms here--it was just dead code
that we didn't need.
This fixes a rebase issue between the int_dict introduction and use
for people.js with the introduce of filter_values on dict.js and use
inside people.js.
Note that we haven't fully swept this for Dict,
since some dicts are keyed by strings. For
example PM counts can have a huddle like
"101,102,103" as a key.
This should be slightly more performant, and we
often call this function N times, such as when
rendering the buddy list.
There's a minor change to pm_list to avoid
an unnecessary computation on huddles that would
otherwise trigger a blueslip warning for the
huddles case.
When we are pulling data from message.display_recipient
for private messages, the user_id field is always
called 'id', not 'user_id', so we can simplify
some defensive code.
This required lots of manual testing:
- search/navigate user presence
- send PM and mention user
- pay attention to compose fade
- send stream msg and mention user
- open Private Messages in top-left and click
- test unread counts
- invite user who already has account
- search for users in search bar
- check user settings
- User Groups
- Users
- Deactivated Users
- Bots
- create a bot
- mention user groups
- send group PM then click on lower right
- view/edit/create streams
If there are still pieces of code that don't convert
ids to ints, the code should still work but report
blueslip errors.
I try to mostly convert user_ids to ints in the callers,
since often the callers are dealing with small amounts
of data, like user ids from huddles.
We only ever show 3 or 4 people in search suggestions
(possibly w/a couple variations, like pm-with/sender/etc.),
so we can try to search a smaller subset of people
before going through the entire realm.
We use message_store.user_ids() for this, since you
typically want to search messages for people that
have sent messages recently, and we already sort
based on PM conversations.
This should avoid some memory allocations.
We also use build_person_matcher to avoid
repeating the same logic over and over
again to process the query into termlets.
We also remove people.get_all_persons() and
people.person_matches_query().
This looks like simple code cleanup, but it's more
than that.
The code cleanup here is that we don't have three
callbacks to get a list of typeaheads for bootstrap.
Instead, we just have one function that does all the
main work.
And then the speedup comes from the fact we no longer
need to remove diacritics from the query for every
time through our loop of seeing if a person matches
the query.
It's a bit subtle to see in the diff, but these are
the relevant lines:
const matcher = exports.get_person_or_user_group_matcher(query);
const filtered_results = _.filter(people_and_groups, matcher);
Before this, bootstrap was doing $.grep, and we'd have
to reinitialize the matcher for every person.
If you profile this before and after, you'll see that
remove_diacritics gets called fewer times.
To profile this, you want to loads lots of users into
your DB and try to autocomplete "Extra", as in "Extra1 User".
If you try to autocomplete something else, then my patch
won't really help, and `remove_diacritics` will still
show up as expensive. Because it is that expensive a function.
This may seem silly now, since we are returning a function
that still dispatches over all flavors of search for
every item, but subsequent commits will make it obvious
why I'm doing this.
We want to do our own matching of items, rather than
just giving a callback to bootstrap, which does $.grep
on all the items.
Doing our own matching gives us flexibility for future
improvements like custom data structures for searching
through big amounts of data. Even in the short term
we can speed up searches by pulling expensive operations
outside the grep/filter call.
This architecture has been in place for our search
bar since ~2014.
The benchmark is commented out. It takes only a few
milliseconds to run, so there may be no reason not
to always run it. It doesn't test correctness, so
it would arguably inflate line coverage, but set/get
are obviously covered elsewhere.
We now require the actual tests to explicitly
to zrequire Dict, rather than magically adding this.
In one case, the use of Dict was clearly just for
the test (not the app), so I converted that an ordinary
JS object (see timerender.js).
We have ~5 years of proof that we'll probably never
extend Dict with more options.
Breaking the classes into makes both a little faster
(no options to check), and we remove some options
in FoldDict that are never used (from/from_array).
A possible next step is to fine-tune the Dict to use
Map internally.
Note that the TypeScript types for FoldDict are now
more specific (requiring string keys). Of course,
this isn't really enforced until we convert other
modules to TS.
We had a potentially nasty bug where we
weren't guaranteeing that all/stream/everyone
collated in consistent ways inside of
`compare_people_for_relevance`, which can
send certain types of sort algorithms into
an infinite loop. I doubt this ever happened
in practice, but it's obviously worth fixing.
Now we also have a clear tiebreaker between
any two all/everyone/stream mentions, which
is the idx field.
Finally, this should be a bit more efficient.
We don't have people named "all". Instead, we
create pseudo person objects with email/full_name
of "all" (along with some other fields). The tests
now reflect this.
We want to mostly deprecate this function (see
the comment I added), so I gave it a more specific
name.
Ideally I'd just fix `stream_create`, but it does
use this function in a couple places, and it's helpful
to reuse the same sort here. In one place stream_create
actually unshifts the "me" user back to the top of the
list, which makes sense for its use case.
If two user_ids in a recent huddle have ids
that sort lexically differently than numerically,
such as 7 and 66, then we were creating two
different buckets in pm_conversations.
This regression was introduced in
263ac0eb45 on
November 21, 2019.
Instead of having our callers pass in a possibly
non-canonical version of a user_ids_string, just
have them pass in a list.
The next commit will canonicalize the sort.
The server may send us ids in the order
[11, 2], instead of [2, 11]. We don't want
to rely on server behavior, regardless, for
the sort.
Our tests now show we process that data.
The current code is is still buggy and causes
us to show the same huddle two different times
for situations where the lexical sort doesn't
match the numerical sort.
This happens on czo often, where Tim is user
7, and his id sorts lexically after ids like
58, 622, 4444, etc.
This should make any operation on subscribed
streams faster (we won't need to filter out
unsubscribed streams every time).
I started writing this before I realized we
had a bug where we call `subscribed_streams`
in a nested loop.
After fixing the bugs, this is not as much of
a bottleneck, but it's still a speedup in many
important places:
* build left sidebar
* every keystroke in search bar
* first keystroke in making #stream_links
* every keystroke in compose stream box
The streams settings code is kinda complicated.
It does a non-deterministic sort of the "others"
bucket when you add elements to the left panel.
They get hidden, anyway. Our values() call now
puts subscribed streams first. It never guaranteed
order, but putting subscribed streams first is
probably a good behavior for most situations.
This defers O(N*S) operations, where
N = number of streams
S = number of subscribers per stream
In many cases we never do an O(N) operation on
a stream. Exceptions include:
- checking stream links from the compose box
- editing a stream
- adding members to a newly added stream
An operation that used to be O(N)--computing
the number of subscribers--is now O(1), and we
don't even pay O(N) on a one-time basis to
compute it (not counting the cost to build the
array from JSON, but we have to do that).
Calling `set_filter_out_inactives` is expensive, since we
count up the number of subscribed streams, which iterates
through all your streams, creates a new list of subscribed
streams, then counts them.
In my dev setup, I created 700 streams, and this shaved
about 700ms off of the initial call to `build_stream_list`.
If we aren't showing users emails, then we don't
want to use emails in the search.
And if we are showing users emails, we want to
search on the email that's displayed to them.
For admins this will be delivery_email.
For regular users we arguably shouldn't search
on emails either, since it mostly causes confusion,
but this commit just preserves the current
behavior for those users (unless `show_email` is
false).
Steve Howell
Tlazypanda
Tim Abbott