Fix `meetsAgeRequirements` for min/max dates #17474

francoisl · 2023-04-15T01:16:59Z

Details

When we check that someone's date of birth is in the 150 years - 18 years range, we currently do a comparison that:

uses the time of day
excludes the min and max dates
Uses the same error message for both >150 years and <18 years conditions

This change uses splits meetsAgeRequirements in two different checks, so that we can use a different error message for each, and also allows the min/max dates to be selected.

Fixed Issues

$ #17426
$ #17981

Tests / QA

Create a workspace
Go to Settings > Workspaces > [Select your workspace] > Issue cards > Connect Bank Account > Connect manually
Fill out the 1 and 2 steps of the form
In the "Personal information" step, choose the oldest possible date for the date of birth selector (i.e. exactly 150 years ago)
Make sure you don't get an error message
[On desktop and web only] Use your keyboard to manually change the date to an older date (e.g. press arrow down after selecting the day or month)
After unselecting the date input, make sure a validation error appears with the message Please enter a valid date of birth (or Por favor, introduce una fecha de nacimiento válida in Spanish)
Change the date to the most recent possible date - 18 years ago
Make sure you don't get an error
[On desktop and web only] Use your keyboard to manually change the date to a more recent date (e.g. press arrow up after selecting the day or month)
After unselecting the date input, make sure a validation error appears with the message Must be over 18 years old (or Debe ser mayor de 18 años in Spanish)

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Web

Oldest possible date

Changing the date manually to an older date

Screen.Recording.2023-04-24.at.2.18.20.PM.mov

Most recent possible date

Changing the date manually to a more recent date

Screen.Recording.2023-04-24.at.2.17.54.PM.mov

Mobile Web - Chrome

Min date

Max date

Mobile Web - Safari

Safari doesn't support restrictions in the date selector #16691 (comment), but you can still test selecting the min/max dates and make sure there are no error

Current max date at time of writing this:

Max date + 1 day: error as expected

Desktop

Screen.Recording.2023-04-24.at.2.39.33.PM.mov

iOS

Android

Min date

Max date

MelvinBot · 2023-04-15T01:33:33Z

@0xmiroslav @Gonals One of you needs to 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]

francoisl · 2023-04-15T01:34:18Z

~~Will CP to staging because this is blocking testing one PR of the current checklist.~~

Edit: no need in the end, the QA checklist can be completed without this

github-actions · 2023-04-15T01:34:38Z

⚠️ ⚠️ Heads up! This pull request has the CP Staging label ⚠️ ⚠️
If you applied the CP Staging label before the PR was merged, the PR will be be immediately deployed to staging even if the open StagingDeployCash deploy checklist is locked.
However if you applied the CP Staging after the PR was merged it's possible it won't be CP'ed automatically. If you need it to be CP'ed to staging, tag a member of @Expensify/mobile-deployers to CP it manually, otherwise you can wait for it to go out with the next deploy.

Gonals · 2023-04-15T14:18:16Z

Rerunning pullerBear, as I'm leaving on parental leave!

MelvinBot · 2023-04-15T14:18:45Z

@s77rt @marcochavezf One of you needs to 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]

Gonals · 2023-04-15T14:24:58Z

Rerunning pullerBear, as I'm leaving on parental leave!

s77rt · 2023-04-15T15:00:08Z

Can you please fix this for getAgeRequirementError too

App/src/libs/ValidationUtils.js

Line 226 in af3ae13

if (testDate.isBetween(longAgoDate, recentDate, undefined, [])) {

The last parameter should be a string, although the empty array also seems to work.

0xmiros · 2023-04-17T11:57:03Z

src/libs/ValidationUtils.js

-    return testDate.isValid() && testDate.isBetween(oneHundredFiftyYearsAgo, eighteenYearsAgo);
+
+    // Only compare the dates (ignore the time), and make the comparison inclusive of the start and end dates
+    return testDate.isValid() && testDate.isBetween(oneHundredFiftyYearsAgo, eighteenYearsAgo, 'day', '[]');


This solution still doesn't work when manually input date older than 1873-04-17 (today - 150 years) as long as picker allows that selection.

I think updating error message is straight forward.

bug.mov

You mean it doesn't work in that the message is technically wrong? Yeah fair point, I'm trying to thing what's the best way to update it:

Either we can update just the message to be something like "Must be over 18 years old and less than 150 years old", or

Split the function meetsAgeRequirements into two functions, e.g. isBelowAgeRequirement and isOverAgeRequirement but that sounds overkill, or

Change the function meetsAgeRequirements to return an int, for example -1 if the age is < 18, 0 if it's fine, 1 if it's over 150 years

Any preference or alternative ideas?

Either 2 or 3, we should introduce new error message right?

You mean it doesn't work in that the message is technically wrong?

correct because this is the main issue we're trying to fix and makes user confused.

I am fine with either 2 or 3 but what I want to suggest is that "Must be over 18 years old and less than 150 years old" should be split. Because "less than 150 years old" is extreme edge case.

correct because this is the main issue we're trying to fix and makes user confused.

Oooh, admittedly I read the issue too fast and thought the problem that QA reported was that we were showing the error if you selected the oldest possible date in the date selector. But yes you're right, and we should use use a different error message then.

Splitting meetsAgeRequirements into two functions works for me. I'm checking about the new error message now because it sounds weird to say you have to be less than 150 years old.

…uirementInclusiveComparison

Introduce `meetsMinimumAgeRequirement()` and `meetsMaximumAgeRequirement()` to replace `meetsAgeRequirements()`. The two functions allow us to show a different error message if a given date is too recent or too far back. For the case a given date is too old for an age, we're reusing the existing invalid date error message for simplicity.

francoisl · 2023-04-24T23:08:34Z

Updated, I split meetsAgeRequirements into two functions. For the case where the date is too old, we're reusing the existing generic error message "Please enter a valid date of birth" as suggested here.

0xmiros

Should we also handle these pages here or out of scope?

0xmiros · 2023-04-25T19:19:16Z

src/libs/ValidationUtils.js

@@ -194,16 +194,27 @@ function isValidPaypalUsername(paypalUsername) {
 }

 /**
- * Validate that "date" is between 18 and 150 years in the past
+ * Validate that a date date meets the minimum age requirement.


double date here 😄

francoisl · 2023-04-25T20:01:30Z

Should we also handle these pages here or out of scope?

These are out of scope, AFAIK we don't have a date restriction on the incorporation date.

0xmiros · 2023-04-25T20:20:44Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible 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 checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android / native
- Android / Chrome
- iOS / native
- iOS / Safari
- MacOS / Chrome / Safari
- MacOS / Desktop
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified proper code patterns were followed (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 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
- 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
- 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 verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
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
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
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(themeColors.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 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.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Web

web.mov

Mobile Web - Chrome

mchrome.mov

Mobile Web - Safari

msafari.mov

Desktop

desktop.mov

iOS

ios.mov

Android

android.mov

0xmiros

LGTM 🎉

OSBotify · 2023-04-27T00:47:56Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

OSBotify · 2023-04-27T05:36:19Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcochavezf in version: 1.3.7-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

OSBotify · 2023-04-28T07:51:46Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 1.3.7-3 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅

Fix meetsAgeRequirements for min/max dates

af3ae13

francoisl self-assigned this Apr 15, 2023

francoisl marked this pull request as ready for review April 15, 2023 01:32

francoisl requested a review from a team as a code owner April 15, 2023 01:32

melvin-bot bot requested review from 0xmiros and Gonals and removed request for a team April 15, 2023 01:33

francoisl added the CP Staging label Apr 15, 2023

Gonals requested review from a team and removed request for Gonals April 15, 2023 14:18

melvin-bot bot requested review from marcochavezf and s77rt and removed request for a team April 15, 2023 14:18

Gonals removed the request for review from s77rt April 15, 2023 14:24

0xmiros reviewed Apr 17, 2023

View reviewed changes

francoisl removed the CP Staging label Apr 17, 2023

francoisl added 2 commits April 24, 2023 13:36

Merge branch 'main' of github.com:Expensify/App into francois-dateReq…

6fe68f4

…uirementInclusiveComparison

francoisl requested a review from 0xmiros April 24, 2023 23:07

0xmiros reviewed Apr 25, 2023

View reviewed changes

Fix duplicate word in function doc

e3cfbc4

0xmiros approved these changes Apr 25, 2023

View reviewed changes

marcochavezf approved these changes Apr 27, 2023

View reviewed changes

marcochavezf merged commit 47898da into main Apr 27, 2023

marcochavezf deleted the francois-dateRequirementInclusiveComparison branch April 27, 2023 00:40

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2023

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2023-04-27 #18063

Closed

19 tasks

This was referenced Apr 28, 2023

[HOLD for payment 2023-05-05] [$1000] Connect Bank Account -Selecting the oldest available date gives an error "Must be over 18 years old" #17426

Closed

[HOLD for payment 2023-05-05] Error message on some DOB dates should be different #17981

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix `meetsAgeRequirements` for min/max dates #17474

Fix `meetsAgeRequirements` for min/max dates #17474

francoisl commented Apr 15, 2023 •

edited

Loading

MelvinBot commented Apr 15, 2023

francoisl commented Apr 15, 2023 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Apr 15, 2023

Gonals commented Apr 15, 2023

MelvinBot commented Apr 15, 2023

Gonals commented Apr 15, 2023

s77rt commented Apr 15, 2023

0xmiros Apr 17, 2023

francoisl Apr 17, 2023

0xmiros Apr 17, 2023

0xmiros Apr 17, 2023

0xmiros Apr 17, 2023

francoisl Apr 17, 2023

francoisl commented Apr 24, 2023

0xmiros left a comment •

edited

Loading

0xmiros Apr 25, 2023

francoisl commented Apr 25, 2023

0xmiros commented Apr 25, 2023

0xmiros left a comment

OSBotify commented Apr 27, 2023

OSBotify commented Apr 27, 2023

OSBotify commented Apr 28, 2023

Fix meetsAgeRequirements for min/max dates #17474

Fix meetsAgeRequirements for min/max dates #17474

Conversation

francoisl commented Apr 15, 2023 • edited Loading

Details

Fixed Issues

Tests / QA

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

MelvinBot commented Apr 15, 2023

francoisl commented Apr 15, 2023 • edited Loading

github-actions bot commented Apr 15, 2023

Gonals commented Apr 15, 2023

MelvinBot commented Apr 15, 2023

Gonals commented Apr 15, 2023

s77rt commented Apr 15, 2023

0xmiros Apr 17, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

francoisl Apr 17, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

0xmiros Apr 17, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

0xmiros Apr 17, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

0xmiros Apr 17, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

francoisl Apr 17, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

francoisl commented Apr 24, 2023

0xmiros left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

0xmiros Apr 25, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

francoisl commented Apr 25, 2023

0xmiros commented Apr 25, 2023

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

0xmiros left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

OSBotify commented Apr 27, 2023

OSBotify commented Apr 27, 2023

OSBotify commented Apr 28, 2023

Fix `meetsAgeRequirements` for min/max dates #17474

Fix `meetsAgeRequirements` for min/max dates #17474

francoisl commented Apr 15, 2023 •

edited

Loading

francoisl commented Apr 15, 2023 •

edited

Loading

0xmiros left a comment •

edited

Loading