We only update the `.private_messages_header` here since
unread_counts of `.expanded_private_message` are updated
via `pm_list.update_private_messages`.
This fixes the bug of PMs in `.expanded_private_message` having
the same unread count as `private_messages_header`.
Since we rerender the DOM of `.expanded_private_message` every
time we update unread count of PMs, we don't need to manually
update them here. Also, we always keep them on display since
there is no real need to toggle them. They are not visible
when they have 0 unread counts via `.zero_count`.
In an effort to use a common class to display unread counts across
the app, we simplify the elements used to show unreads and use a
single `span` with `unread_count` class to do so.
We now consistently set the PM counts for the right
sidebar toggle in unread_ui, similar to what we
do for the overall counts in the left sidebar toggle.
(Use a thin window to see the code in action.)
This breaks a dependency cycle.
In passing I improve the test coverage for the
actual job that pm_list still does (updating its
own total count in the "Private Messages" section).
Now when we want to measure how long a block
of code takes to execute, we just wrap it with
`blueslip.measure_time`, instead of the awkward
idiom from my original commit of getting a callback
function.
My rationale for the original scheme was that I
wanted to minimize diffs and avoid changing
`const` to `let` in a few cases, but I believe
now that the function wrapper is nicer.
In a few cases I just removed the blueslip timing
code, since I was able to confirm on czo that
the times were pretty minimal.
Instead of prohibiting ‘return undefined’ (#8669), we require that a
function must return an explicit value always or never. This prevents
you from forgetting to return a value in some cases. It will also be
important for TypeScript, which distinguishes between undefined and
void.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
ES and TypeScript modules are strict by default and don’t need this
directive. ESLint will remind us to add it to new CommonJS files and
remove it from ES and TypeScript modules.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
Prettier would do this anyway, but it’s separated out for a more
reviewable diff. Generated by ESLint.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulip.com>
When switching from Private Messages narrow to
All messages narrow, stream list max-height was not
correctly updated. Stream list max-height was calculated
before new height were updated by browser for
All message narrow.
Inshort:
Stream list max-height was being updated before the browser could
render height for `#global_filters`. Calling resize after narrow
completes removes this issue.
We now use vdom-ish techniques to track the
list items for the pm list. When we go to update
the list, we only re-render nodes whose data
has changed, with two exceptions:
- Obviously, the first time we do a full render.
- If the keys for the items have changed (i.e.
a new node has come in or the order has changed),
we just re-render the whole list.
If the keys are the same since the last re-render, we
only re-render individual items if their data has
changed.
Most of the new code is in these two modules:
- pm_list_dom.js
- vdom.js
We remove all of the code in pm_list.js that is
related to updating DOM with unread counts.
For presence updates, we are now *never*
re-rendering the whole list, since presence
updates only change individual line items and
don't affect the keys. Instead, we just update
any changed elements in place.
The main thing that makes this all work is the
`update` method in `vdom`, which is totally generic
and essentially does a few simple jobs:
- detect if keys are different
- just render the whole ul as needed
- for items that change, do the appropriate
jQuery to update the item in place
Note that this code seems to play nice with simplebar.
Also, this code continues to use templates to render
the individual list items.
FWIW this code isn't radically different than list_render,
but it's got some key differences:
- There are fewer bells and whistles in this code.
Some of the stuff that list_render does is overkill
for the PM list.
- This code detects data changes.
Note that the vdom scheme is agnostic about templates;
it simply requires the child nodes to provide a render
method. (This is similar to list_render, which is also
technically agnostic about rendering, but which also
does use templates in most cases.)
These fixes are somewhat related to #13605, but we
haven't gotten a solid repro on that issue, and
the scrolling issues there may be orthogonal to the
redraws. But having fewer moving parts here should
help, and we won't get the rug pulled out from under
us on every presence update.
There are two possible extensions to this that are
somewhat overlapping in nature, but can be done
one a time.
* We can do a deeper vdom approach here that
gets us away from templates, and just have
nodes write to an AST. I have this on another
branch, but it might be overkill.
* We can avoid some redraws by detecting where
keys are moving up and down. I'm not completely
sure we need it for the PM list.
If this gets merged, we may want to try similar
things for the stream list, which also does a fairly
complicated mixture of big-hammer re-renders and
surgical updates-in-place (with custom code).
BTW we have 100% line coverage for vdom.js.
This is relatively unobtrusive, and we don't send
anything to the server.
But any user can now enter blueslip.timings in the
console to see a map of how long things take in
milliseconds. We only record one timing per
event label (i.e. the most recent).
It's pretty easy to test this by just clicking
around. For 300 users/streams most things are
fast except for:
- initialize_everything
- manage streams (render_subscriptions)
Both do lots of nontrivial work, although
"manage streams" is a bit surprising, since
we're only measuring how long to build the
HTML from the templates (whereas the real
time is probably browser rendering costs).
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
This commit was originally automatically generated using `tools/lint
--only=eslint --fix`. It was then modified by tabbott to contain only
changes to a set of files that are unlikely to result in significant
merge conflicts with any open pull request, excluding about 20 files.
His plan is to merge the remaining changes with more precise care,
potentially involving merging parts of conflicting pull requests
before running the `eslint --fix` operation.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
With webpack, variables declared in each file are already file-local
(Global variables need to be explicitly exported), so these IIFEs are
no longer needed.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <andersk@mit.edu>
This changes the availability icon for bot users to user_circle_green;
previously it was accidentally defaulting to user_circle_empty, making
it appear that bots were never available.
Fixes#13149.
With perfectScrollbar, we needed to call a function from JavaScript to
enable a scrollbar on a new element, but simplebar has a much simpler
default API one can do by using data-simplebar attributes in the HTML.
So we can delete all the scrollbar creation/deletion code.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
Instead of deleting and rebuilding #private-container every time its
contents need to be updated, just replace its contents. This
eliminates some scrollbar flashing.
Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <anders@zulipchat.com>
Now that we have a scroll container for the PM list,
it doesn't make much sense to limit the number to
five.
We may resurrect this feature if "more conversations"
actually fetches more conversations, but it doesn't
currently.
We also may soon make it easy to limit PMs to just
unread messages, which will make the max-5 feature
perhaps less necessary, and we don't want to make
the UI overly complicated.
We now just calculate two vars:
pm_list - which individual PM conversation to highlight
is_pm_filter - highlight "Private messages"
The logic is structured so that we err on the side of **not**
spuriously selecting list items:
* be defensive about `filter` not existing for some reason
* don't select anything if we have multiple pm-with
operands in the search (which is sort of undefined
behavior)
Tweaked by tabbott to add a comment explaining the multiple pm-with case.
Aman Agrawal
Steve Howell
Anders Kaseorg
Priyank Patel
Aman Agrawal
Anders Kaseorg
Steve Howell
clarammdantas
Anders Kaseorg