feat: Single credit line for Journal Entry #1017
Conversation
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces modifications to configuration objects for NetSuite and Xero integrations. Key changes include the addition of properties related to single credit line journal entries and updates to existing labels for grammatical consistency. The changes affect multiple files, enhancing advanced settings functionality, visibility conditions for UI fields, and adjustments to methods that handle configuration payloads. Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Poem
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
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 (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 5
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (8)
src/app/core/models/netsuite/netsuite-configuration/netsuite-advanced-settings.model.ts (2)
142-142: LGTM: New form control added correctly.The
singleCreditLineJEform control has been added correctly to the form group in themapAPIResponseToFormGroupmethod. It's properly initialized with the value from the configuration.For consistency with other boolean controls in this method, consider using the nullish coalescing operator:
singleCreditLineJE: new FormControl(advancedSettings?.configuration.je_single_credit_line ?? false),This ensures that the control always has a boolean value, even if
je_single_credit_lineis undefined.
165-166: LGTM: New property added correctly to payload.The
je_single_credit_lineproperty has been correctly added to the configuration in theconstructPayloadmethod. The value is properly set from the form control with a fallback tofalse.For consistency with other properties in this method, consider using optional chaining:
je_single_credit_line: advancedSettingsForm.get('singleCreditLineJE')?.value ?? falseThis approach is more consistent with how other properties are accessed in this method and provides additional null safety.
src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-advanced-settings/netsuite-advanced-settings.component.html (2)
90-96: LGTM! Consider improving readability.The addition of the auto-create vendors toggle field is well-implemented. It uses conditional rendering and dynamic content effectively.
To improve readability, consider breaking the long string concatenation in the
subLabelattribute into multiple lines:[subLabel]="'While exporting reimbursable expenses from ' + brandingConfig.brandName + ', the integration will automatically create a ' + getCreateVendorLabel().toLowerCase() + ' if a match does not exist in NetSuite already.'"
98-105: LGTM! Consider improving consistency.The addition of the auto-create merchants toggle field is well-implemented, using conditional rendering and dynamic content effectively.
For consistency with the previous field, consider breaking the long string concatenation in the
subLabelattribute into multiple lines:[subLabel]="'While exporting credit card expenses from ' + brandingConfig.brandName + ', the integration will automatically create a merchant if a match does not exist in NetSuite already.'"src/app/branding/c1-contents-config.ts (3)
89-89: Approved: New option for journal entry handlingThe addition of
singleCreditLineJELabelintroduces a new feature for creating a single itemized offset credit entry for journals. This can potentially simplify the journal entry process.Consider a minor grammatical adjustment:
-singleCreditLineJELabel: 'Create a single itemized offset credit entry for Journal', +singleCreditLineJELabel: 'Create a single itemized offset credit entry for Journal entries',This change makes it clear that the feature applies to multiple journal entries, not just a single journal.
90-90: Approved: Clear explanation for new journal entry featureThe addition of
singleCreditLineJESubLabelprovides a concise and helpful explanation of the new single credit line feature for journal entries.Consider these minor style improvements:
-singleCreditLineJESubLabel: 'Merge all Credits in a Journal to create a single entry.' +singleCreditLineJESubLabel: 'Merge all credits in a journal to create a single entry.'This change ensures consistent capitalization, aligning with typical style guidelines for UI text.
88-90: Consider applying similar changes to other integrationsThe changes introduce a new feature for creating single itemized offset credit entries in journal entries for the NetSuite integration. This feature could potentially simplify accounting processes by consolidating credit entries.
Consider the following:
- Evaluate if this feature would be beneficial for other integrations like Xero or QuickBooks Online.
- If applicable, implement similar changes in the configuration for other integrations to maintain consistency across the application.
- Ensure that the backend logic supports this new feature for the NetSuite integration and is prepared to handle it for other integrations if implemented.
These considerations will help maintain feature parity across different integrations and prepare the system for potential future enhancements.
src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-export-settings/netsuite-export-settings.component.ts (1)
223-225: Improve Readability ofisAdvancedSettingAffected()MethodThe return statement in the
isAdvancedSettingAffected()method is lengthy and can be difficult to read and maintain. Breaking down the conditions into intermediate variables can enhance clarity and make future modifications easier.Refactored code suggestion:
private isAdvancedSettingAffected(): boolean { const reimbursableChangedToJE = this.exportSettings?.configuration?.reimbursable_expenses_object !== NetsuiteReimbursableExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY && this.exportSettingForm.value.reimbursableExportType === NetsuiteReimbursableExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY; const cccChangedToJE = this.exportSettings?.configuration?.corporate_credit_card_expenses_object !== NetSuiteCorporateCreditCardExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY && this.exportSettingForm.value.creditCardExportType === NetSuiteCorporateCreditCardExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY; return reimbursableChangedToJE || cccChangedToJE; }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
- src/app/branding/c1-contents-config.ts (1 hunks)
- src/app/branding/fyle-contents-config.ts (1 hunks)
- src/app/core/models/branding/content-configuration.model.ts (1 hunks)
- src/app/core/models/netsuite/netsuite-configuration/netsuite-advanced-settings.model.ts (3 hunks)
- src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-advanced-settings/netsuite-advanced-settings.component.html (1 hunks)
- src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-advanced-settings/netsuite-advanced-settings.component.ts (1 hunks)
- src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-export-settings/netsuite-export-settings.component.ts (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (13)
src/app/core/models/netsuite/netsuite-configuration/netsuite-advanced-settings.model.ts (2)
17-18: LGTM: New property added correctly.The new
je_single_credit_lineboolean property has been added correctly to theNetsuiteAdvancedSettingConfigurationtype. It follows the existing naming convention (snake_case) and type (boolean) used in the configuration.
Line range hint
1-194: Overall assessment: Changes are well-implemented and consistent.The additions for the single credit line journal entry feature have been implemented correctly and consistently throughout the file. The changes respect existing conventions and integrate well with the current structure. The minor suggestions provided earlier will further enhance consistency, but the current implementation is already solid and functional.
src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-advanced-settings/netsuite-advanced-settings.component.ts (4)
197-199: LGTM: New method for single credit line JE field visibilityThe
isSingleCreditLineJEFieldVisible()method is well-implemented. It correctly checks the values ofreimbursable_expenses_objectandcorporate_credit_card_expenses_objectto determine the visibility of the single credit line JE field.
Line range hint
193-195: LGTM: Improved null check in isPaymentSyncFieldVisible()The addition of a null check for
reimbursable_expenses_objectenhances the robustness of theisPaymentSyncFieldVisible()method. This change prevents potential runtime errors and improves the overall reliability of the component.
Line range hint
1-285: Summary: Good improvements to NetsuiteAdvancedSettingsComponentThe changes to this component enhance its functionality and robustness. The new
isSingleCreditLineJEFieldVisible()method and the improved null check inisPaymentSyncFieldVisible()are well-implemented. The only suggestion is to verify the usage of the new method in the template or add appropriate documentation if it's intended for future use.Overall, these changes contribute positively to the component's functionality and maintainability.
197-199: Verify usage of isSingleCreditLineJEFieldVisible()The newly added
isSingleCreditLineJEFieldVisible()method is not used within the visible part of the component. Please ensure that this method is being used in the component's template. If it's intended for future use, consider adding a TODO comment to indicate its purpose and planned implementation.To check the usage of this method, you can run the following command:
If the method is not found in the template, you may want to add a TODO comment or implement its usage.
✅ Verification successful
Usage of isSingleCreditLineJEFieldVisible() Verified
The
isSingleCreditLineJEFieldVisible()method is successfully used within the component's template at line 106. No further action is required.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Search for the usage of isSingleCreditLineJEFieldVisible() in the component's template grep -n "isSingleCreditLineJEFieldVisible" src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-advanced-settings/netsuite-advanced-settings.component.htmlLength of output: 342
src/app/core/models/branding/content-configuration.model.ts (1)
85-86: LGTM. Please provide more context about the single credit line feature.The addition of
singleCreditLineJELabelandsingleCreditLineJESubLabelproperties is consistent with the existing structure and naming conventions in theadvancedSettingsobject. This change appears to support the new feature mentioned in the PR title.To ensure consistency across the codebase, could you provide more information about where these new labels will be used? Additionally, please update the PR description with details about the single credit line for Journal Entry feature and how it impacts the user interface and functionality.
src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-advanced-settings/netsuite-advanced-settings.component.html (2)
106-113: LGTM! Please clarify the use of the "tw-pt-0" class.The addition of the single credit line journal entries toggle field is well-implemented, using conditional rendering and dynamic content effectively.
Could you please clarify the purpose of adding the "tw-pt-0" class to this specific toggle field? It seems to remove the top padding, which might affect the visual consistency with other toggle fields. If this is intentional, consider adding a comment explaining the reason for this specific styling.
90-113: Overall, these changes enhance the NetSuite integration configuration.The additions of toggle fields for auto-creating vendors, auto-creating merchants, and single credit line journal entries provide users with more granular control over the NetSuite integration. These features are well-implemented, using conditional rendering and dynamic content effectively.
To further improve the code:
- Consider standardizing the string concatenation style for
subLabelattributes across all toggle fields for better readability and maintainability.- Ensure that the styling (particularly the "tw-pt-0" class) is consistent and intentional across all toggle fields.
These enhancements align well with the PR objective of introducing a "Single credit line for Journal Entry" feature, while also adding related configuration options for vendor and merchant creation.
src/app/branding/c1-contents-config.ts (1)
88-88: Approved: Improved clarity in label textThe change from "merchants" to "merchant" in the
autoCreateMerchantsLabelimproves grammatical consistency and better reflects the typical use case of creating a single merchant for each credit card charge.src/app/branding/fyle-contents-config.ts (3)
88-90: New properties added to advanced settingsThree new properties have been added to the
advancedSettingssection for NetSuite integration:
autoCreateMerchantsLabel: This property has been updated to correct a grammatical issue.singleCreditLineJELabel: A new property for creating a single itemized offset credit entry for Journal.singleCreditLineJESubLabel: A sub-label explaining the purpose of the single credit line feature.These additions enhance the configuration options for the NetSuite integration, providing more flexibility in how journal entries are created and how merchants are handled.
88-90: Summary of changes and their impactThe changes to the NetSuite integration configuration enhance its functionality by:
- Correcting the grammar in
autoCreateMerchantsLabel.- Adding options for creating a single itemized offset credit entry for Journal entries.
These changes improve the flexibility of the NetSuite integration and align it more closely with the QuickBooks Online integration. However, consider the following points:
- Ensure that the UI and business logic are updated to support these new options.
- Consider adding similar properties to the Xero integration for consistency, if applicable.
Overall, these changes are beneficial and improve the configuration options for the NetSuite integration.
88-90: Verify implementation of new optionsThe new properties added to the NetSuite integration's advanced settings (
autoCreateMerchantsLabel,singleCreditLineJELabel, andsingleCreditLineJESubLabel) will require corresponding changes in the UI and business logic. Please ensure that:
- The UI components are updated to display these new options.
- The business logic handles the new "single credit line for Journal" feature correctly.
- The auto-creation of merchants for credit card charges is implemented as per the updated label.
To verify the implementation, please run the following script:
| autoCreateMerchantsLabel: 'Auto Create Merchant on NetSuite for Credit Card Charge', | ||
| singleCreditLineJELabel: 'Create a single itemized offset credit entry for Journal', | ||
| singleCreditLineJESubLabel: 'Merge all Credits in a Journal to create a single entry.' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider adding similar properties to Xero integration
The new properties added to the NetSuite integration (singleCreditLineJELabel and singleCreditLineJESubLabel) are also present in the QuickBooks Online integration. However, these properties are missing from the Xero integration. For consistency across integrations, consider:
- Adding these properties to the Xero integration if the functionality is applicable.
- If not applicable to Xero, document the reason for the difference to maintain clarity for future development.
To check the current state of the Xero integration, run the following script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check Xero integration for similar properties
echo "Searching for single credit line properties in Xero integration:"
rg --type typescript 'xero.*singleCreditLineJE'
echo "Searching for auto-create merchants properties in Xero integration:"
rg --type typescript 'xero.*autoCreateMerchants'| } else if (this.isAdvancedSettingAffected()) { | ||
| this.router.navigate(['/integrations/netsuite/main/configuration/advanced_settings']); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Reconsider Navigation Logic After Saving Settings
In the constructPayloadAndSave method, when isAdvancedSettingAffected() returns true, the user is automatically redirected to the advanced settings page after saving. This abrupt navigation might confuse users who are not expecting it. Consider providing a prompt or notification to inform the user about the impact on advanced settings, allowing them to choose whether to navigate there.
| if (this.isAdvancedSettingAffected()) { | ||
| this.warningDialogText = this.constructWarningMessage(); | ||
| this.isConfirmationDialogVisible = true; | ||
| return; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codebase verification
Inconsistent Confirmation Flow Detected in constructPayloadAndSave Methods
Verification confirms that the constructPayloadAndSave method handles confirmation dialogs inconsistently across different integration components. Some implementations prompt for confirmation before navigation, while others redirect without explicit user confirmation.
Affected Files:
- src/app/integrations/xero/xero-shared/xero-import-settings/xero-import-settings.component.ts
- src/app/integrations/xero/xero-shared/xero-export-settings/xero-export-settings.component.ts
- src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-export-settings/netsuite-export-settings.component.ts
- ... (additional files as identified)
Recommendation:
Standardize the confirmation flow in all instances of constructPayloadAndSave to ensure consistent user experience. Either always prompt for confirmation before navigation or ensure navigation occurs only after explicit user confirmation.
🔗 Analysis chain
Align Confirmation Flow in save() Method
In the save() method, when isAdvancedSettingAffected() returns true, a confirmation dialog is shown, and the method returns early, preventing further execution. However, in the constructPayloadAndSave method, if isAdvancedSettingAffected() returns true during a non-onboarding flow, the user is redirected to the advanced settings without confirmation.
This inconsistency might confuse users. Consider harmonizing the flow by either always prompting the user before navigation or ensuring that navigation only occurs after explicit confirmation.
To verify where constructPayloadAndSave is called and analyze the flow, run the following script:
This script searches for all calls to constructPayloadAndSave and provides surrounding context to help review the navigation logic.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find all occurrences of `constructPayloadAndSave` to ensure consistent confirmation flow.
rg --type typescript 'constructPayloadAndSave\(' -A 5
Length of output: 90
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find all occurrences of `constructPayloadAndSave` to ensure consistent confirmation flow.
rg --type ts 'constructPayloadAndSave\(' -A 5
Length of output: 38366
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Extract the implementation of `constructPayloadAndSave` methods from relevant TypeScript files to verify confirmation flow consistency.
# List of files where `constructPayloadAndSave` was found
FILES=(
"src/app/integrations/xero/xero-shared/xero-import-settings/xero-import-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/xero/xero-shared/xero-export-settings/xero-export-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-export-settings/netsuite-export-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/xero/xero-onboarding/xero-onboarding-connector/xero-onboarding-connector.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/travelperk/travelperk-shared/travelperk-payment-profile-settings/travelperk-payment-profile-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/travelperk/travelperk-shared/travelperk-advanced-settings/travelperk-advanced-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/sage300/sage300-shared/sage300-import-settings/sage300-import-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/sage300/sage300-shared/sage300-export-settings/sage300-export-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/sage300/sage300-shared/sage300-advanced-settings/sage300-advanced-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/qbd/qbd-shared/qbd-advanced-setting/qbd-advanced-setting.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/qbd/qbd-shared/qbd-field-mapping/qbd-field-mapping.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/qbo/qbo-shared/qbo-export-settings/qbo-export-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/qbo/qbo-shared/qbo-employee-settings/qbo-employee-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/business-central/business-central-shared/business-central-export-settings/business-central-export-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/business-central/business-central-shared/business-central-advanced-settings/business-central-advanced-settings.component.ts"
"src/app/integrations/business-central/business-central-shared/business-central-import-settings/business-central-import-settings.component.ts"
)
# Iterate over each file and extract the `constructPayloadAndSave` method implementation
for FILE in "${FILES[@]}"; do
echo "=== $FILE ==="
rg --type ts 'constructPayloadAndSave\s*\(' "$FILE" -A 15 -B 5
echo "===================="
done
Length of output: 39708
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-export-settings/netsuite-export-settings.component.ts (2)
209-210: LGTM! Consider adding a user notification.The addition of the
isAdvancedSettingAffected()check and subsequent navigation to the advanced settings page is a good improvement. It ensures users are directed to relevant settings when necessary.Consider adding a user notification before navigating to the advanced settings page to inform the user why they are being redirected.
271-275: LGTM! Consider adding error handling.The addition of the advanced settings check and warning dialog improves the user experience by informing them about potential impacts on advanced settings.
Consider adding error handling for the case where
this.exportSettings.configurationis undefined. This could prevent potential runtime errors:if (this.isAdvancedSettingAffected() && this.exportSettings?.configuration) { this.warningDialogText = this.constructWarningMessage(); this.isConfirmationDialogVisible = true; return; }This change ensures that
configurationexists before attempting to construct the warning message.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-export-settings/netsuite-export-settings.component.ts (2 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
src/app/integrations/netsuite/netsuite-shared/netsuite-export-settings/netsuite-export-settings.component.ts (1)
Line range hint
1-269: Overall improvements in export settings handling.The changes in this file significantly enhance the handling of export settings, particularly when they affect advanced configurations. The new methods (
isAdvancedSettingAffected,replaceContentBasedOnConfiguration, andconstructWarningMessage) work together to provide users with clear warnings and guidance when their changes impact advanced settings.The modifications to existing methods (
constructPayloadAndSaveandsave) integrate these new features seamlessly, improving the overall user experience.While the changes are generally well-implemented, consider the suggested refactors and improvements in the previous comments to further enhance code readability, maintainability, and robustness.
| private isAdvancedSettingAffected(): boolean { | ||
| return (this.exportSettings?.configuration?.reimbursable_expenses_object !== NetsuiteReimbursableExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY && this.exportSettingForm.value.reimbursableExportType === NetsuiteReimbursableExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY) || (this.exportSettings?.configuration?.corporate_credit_card_expenses_object !== NetSuiteCorporateCreditCardExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY && this.exportSettingForm.value.creditCardExportType === NetSuiteCorporateCreditCardExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider refactoring for improved readability.
The isAdvancedSettingAffected method correctly checks for changes that would affect advanced settings. However, the single-line return statement with multiple conditions might be hard to read and maintain.
Consider refactoring the method for improved readability:
private isAdvancedSettingAffected(): boolean {
const isReimbursableChanged =
this.exportSettings?.configuration?.reimbursable_expenses_object !== NetsuiteReimbursableExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY &&
this.exportSettingForm.value.reimbursableExportType === NetsuiteReimbursableExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY;
const isCorporateCardChanged =
this.exportSettings?.configuration?.corporate_credit_card_expenses_object !== NetSuiteCorporateCreditCardExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY &&
this.exportSettingForm.value.creditCardExportType === NetSuiteCorporateCreditCardExpensesObject.JOURNAL_ENTRY;
return isReimbursableChanged || isCorporateCardChanged;
}This refactored version separates the conditions for reimbursable and corporate card changes, making the code more readable and easier to maintain.
| private replaceContentBasedOnConfiguration(updatedConfiguration: string, existingConfiguration: string | undefined | null, exportType: string): string { | ||
| const configurationUpdate = `You have changed the export type of $exportType expense from <b>$existingExportType</b> to <b>$updatedExportType</b>, | ||
| which would impact a few configurations in the <b>Advanced settings</b>. <br><br>Please revisit the <b>Advanced settings</b> to check and enable the | ||
| features that could help customize and automate your integration workflows.`; | ||
|
|
||
| let content = ''; | ||
| // If both are not none and it is an update case else for the new addition case | ||
| if (updatedConfiguration && existingConfiguration) { | ||
| content = configurationUpdate.replace('$exportType', exportType).replace('$existingExportType', existingConfiguration.toLowerCase().replace(/^\w/, (c: string) => c.toUpperCase())).replace('$updatedExportType', updatedConfiguration.toLowerCase().replace(/^\w/, (c: string) => c.toUpperCase())); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return content; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Improve string manipulation and extract repeated logic.
The replaceContentBasedOnConfiguration method effectively generates a customized warning message. However, there are opportunities to improve code clarity and reusability.
Consider the following improvements:
- Use template literals for easier string interpolation.
- Extract the capitalization logic into a separate method.
- Simplify the content generation logic.
Here's a refactored version:
private capitalizeFirstLetter(str: string): string {
return str.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + str.slice(1).toLowerCase();
}
private replaceContentBasedOnConfiguration(updatedConfiguration: string, existingConfiguration: string | undefined | null, exportType: string): string {
if (updatedConfiguration && existingConfiguration) {
const existingExportTypeFormatted = this.capitalizeFirstLetter(existingConfiguration);
const updatedExportTypeFormatted = this.capitalizeFirstLetter(updatedConfiguration);
return `You have changed the export type of ${exportType} expense from <b>${existingExportTypeFormatted}</b> to <b>${updatedExportTypeFormatted}</b>,
which would impact a few configurations in the <b>Advanced settings</b>.<br><br>Please revisit the <b>Advanced settings</b> to check and enable the
features that could help customize and automate your integration workflows.`;
}
return '';
}This refactored version improves readability and reduces code duplication.
| private constructWarningMessage(): string { | ||
| let content: string = ''; | ||
| const existingReimbursableExportType = this.exportSettings?.configuration?.reimbursable_expenses_object; | ||
| const existingCorporateCardExportType = this.exportSettings?.configuration?.corporate_credit_card_expenses_object; | ||
|
|
||
| const updatedReimbursableExportType = this.exportSettingForm.value.reimbursableExportType ? this.exportSettingForm.value.reimbursableExportType : null; | ||
| const updatedCorporateCardExportType = this.exportSettingForm.value.creditCardExportType ? this.exportSettingForm.value.creditCardExportType : null; | ||
|
|
||
| let updatedExportType; | ||
| let existingExportType; | ||
| let exportType; | ||
|
|
||
| if (existingReimbursableExportType !== updatedReimbursableExportType) { | ||
| updatedExportType = updatedReimbursableExportType; | ||
| existingExportType = existingReimbursableExportType; | ||
| exportType = 'reimbursable'; | ||
| } else if (existingCorporateCardExportType !== updatedCorporateCardExportType) { | ||
| updatedExportType = updatedCorporateCardExportType; | ||
| existingExportType = existingCorporateCardExportType; | ||
| exportType = 'credit card'; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (this.isAdvancedSettingAffected() && exportType) { | ||
| content = this.replaceContentBasedOnConfiguration(updatedExportType, existingExportType, exportType); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return content; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Simplify logic and handle multiple changes.
The constructWarningMessage method effectively determines export type changes and constructs a warning message. However, there are opportunities for improvement.
The current implementation only handles one change at a time. If both reimbursable and corporate card export types change, only the first change will be reported in the warning message.
Consider refactoring the method to handle multiple changes and simplify the logic:
private constructWarningMessage(): string {
const changes = [
{
type: 'reimbursable',
existing: this.exportSettings?.configuration?.reimbursable_expenses_object,
updated: this.exportSettingForm.value.reimbursableExportType
},
{
type: 'credit card',
existing: this.exportSettings?.configuration?.corporate_credit_card_expenses_object,
updated: this.exportSettingForm.value.creditCardExportType
}
];
return changes
.filter(change => change.existing !== change.updated && this.isAdvancedSettingAffected())
.map(change => this.replaceContentBasedOnConfiguration(change.updated, change.existing, change.type))
.join('<br><br>');
}This refactored version handles multiple changes, reduces redundancy, and improves readability.
Description
Please add PR description here, add screenshots if needed
Clickup
Please add link here
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation