feat: shift system #94
Conversation
This reverts commit d1eff25.
Prefixed all collections and fields names with the extension name.
…o avoid reloading the nuxt app when clicking a shift.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice generalisation :)
| // modal: { | ||
| // wrapper: "relative z-50", | ||
| // inner: "fixed inset-0 overflow-y-auto", | ||
| // container: | ||
| // "flex min-h-full items-end sm:items-center justify-center text-center", | ||
| // padding: "p-4 sm:p-0", | ||
| // margin: "sm:my-8", | ||
| // base: "relative text-left rtl:text-right overflow-hidden w-full flex flex-col", | ||
| // overlay: { | ||
| // base: "fixed inset-0 transition-opacity", | ||
| // background: "bg-primary/20 dark:bg-gray-800/75", | ||
| // transition: { | ||
| // enter: "ease-out duration-300", | ||
| // enterFrom: "opacity-0", | ||
| // enterTo: "opacity-100", | ||
| // leave: "ease-in duration-200", | ||
| // leaveFrom: "opacity-100", | ||
| // leaveTo: "opacity-0", | ||
| // }, | ||
| // }, | ||
| // background: "bg-white dark:bg-gray-900", | ||
| // ring: "", | ||
| // rounded: "border border-purple-500 rounded-xl", | ||
| // shadow: "", | ||
| // width: "sm:max-w-[520px]", | ||
| // height: "", | ||
| // transition: { | ||
| // enter: "ease-out duration-300", | ||
| // enterFrom: "opacity-0 translate-y-4 sm:translate-y-0 sm:scale-95", | ||
| // enterTo: "opacity-100 translate-y-0 sm:scale-100", | ||
| // leave: "ease-in duration-200", | ||
| // leaveFrom: "opacity-100 translate-y-0 sm:scale-100", | ||
| // leaveTo: "opacity-0 translate-y-4 sm:translate-y-0 sm:scale-95", | ||
| // }, | ||
| // }, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Robert Martin from "Clean Code" is very, errr, assertive about removing code instead of commenting it out 😛
It makes me crazy to see stretches of code that are commented out. Who knows how old it is? Who knows whether or not it’s meaningful? Yet no one will delete it because everyone assumes someone else needs it or has plans for it.
That code sits there and rots, getting less and less relevant with every passing day. It calls functions that no longer exist. It uses variables whose names have changed. It follows conventions that are long obsolete. It pollutes the modules that contain it and distracts the people who try to read it. Commented-out code is an abomination.
When you see commented-out code, delete it! Don’t worry; the source code control system still remembers it. If anyone really needs it, he or she can go back and check out a previous version. Don’t suffer commented-out code to survive.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have the same opinion :)
| await updateEvents( | ||
| DateTime.fromJSDate(calendar.view.activeStart), | ||
| DateTime.fromJSDate(calendar.view.activeEnd), | ||
| ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I get the following error on those lines when I try to access the calendar. The calendar shows up but is empty.
{"errors":[{"message":"Invalid query. \"_in\" has to be an array of values.","extensions":{"code":"INVALID_QUERY","reason":"\"_in\" has to be an array of values"}}]}| rrule: RRule; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| export const getShiftOccurrences = async ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If I understood correctly, this function hides all the occurrences without an available slot?
I think hiding slots is confusing for normal users, they need to see the structure of the shifts. I would instead show all occurrences and all slots but fade out the unavailable ones a bit or highlight the available ones.
| shifts_from: { _lte: to.toISO() }, | ||
| shifts_status: { _eq: ItemStatus.PUBLISHED }, | ||
| }, | ||
| fields: ["*", "shift_slots.*", "shift_slots.shifts_assignments.*"], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure where that differences come from, but according to my IDE this is invalid and should be
fields: ["*", { shifts_slots: ["*", { shifts_assignments: ["*"] }] }],I guess yours doesn't show any errors here?
| export const isShiftDurationModelActive = ( | ||
| durationModel: { shifts_from: string; shifts_to?: string }, | ||
| atDate?: DateTime, | ||
| ): boolean => { | ||
| return isFromToActive( | ||
| DateTime.fromISO(durationModel.shifts_from), | ||
| durationModel.shifts_to | ||
| ? DateTime.fromISO(durationModel.shifts_to) | ||
| : undefined, | ||
| atDate, | ||
| true, | ||
| ); | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| export const isFromToActive = ( | ||
| from: DateTime, | ||
| to?: DateTime, | ||
| atDate?: DateTime, | ||
| dateOnly = true, | ||
| ): boolean => { | ||
| if (!atDate) { | ||
| atDate = DateTime.now(); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (dateOnly) { | ||
| from = from.startOf("day"); | ||
| to = to?.endOf("day"); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if (from > atDate) { | ||
| return false; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return !(to && to < atDate); | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought I had removed those two since they are now under utils, I guess they got re-added by mistake when merging?
pnpm dev gives warnings about them being defined twice.
No description provided.