mirror of
https://github.com/we-promise/sure.git
synced 2026-09-09 00:24:15 +00:00
buzzromainandClaude Opus 5
7176b4b521
* fix(goals): stop the first goal being told about earmarks it has none of Linking an account and leaving the amount blank shows "This account will fund whatever is left after the other earmarks". On a first goal there are no other earmarks — so the sentence points at something absent, and it is where a user meets the word for the first time. The row already carries `data-earmarked-by-others`, and it is zero in that case. With the account to itself the hint now says so plainly, and "earmark" appears only where earmarks actually exist — which lets the context do the explaining instead of the vocabulary needing it. Pinned server-side rather than in JS. The branch is a ternary; the failure that matters is the form not handing over the second string, which does not raise — the value reads as undefined and the line renders empty. There is also a test that the two hints stay different, since identical copy would leave the branch doing nothing and the first-time reader back where they started. Nothing runs `test/javascript` — no npm script, no CI step — so a test there would have guarded nothing. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016GTNba5qE5NwzaHzbp27ye * fix(goals): tell an account claimed in full from one claimed by nobody Review on #3216. The new "this account is yours alone" hint keyed off `earmarked_by_other_goals`, which sums `allocated_amount` — and a whole-account link carries nil, so it contributes zero. An account another goal already claims in full therefore looked exactly like an unclaimed one. The form promised the whole balance, and `whole_account_link_must_be_exclusive` refused the blank allocation on submit. That is worse than the sentence this PR set out to fix: it does not merely describe something absent, it describes something the save then contradicts. The row carries both readings now, because neither can be derived from the other. `whole_account_claimed_by_other_goals?` asks the question the sum cannot answer, and the two share the same row filter so the goal being edited is excluded from both. The two tests added here also move above the first `private`, same as on `define_method`, which is public regardless — but they read as a mistake sitting among the helpers. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016GTNba5qE5NwzaHzbp27ye --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
56 lines
2.5 KiB
Ruby
56 lines
2.5 KiB
Ruby
module GoalsHelper
|
|
# Completing a goal releases the money it was holding, so both places that
|
|
# offer it — the header menu and the celebration panel — ask first, and ask
|
|
# the same question. Built here rather than twice inline: the two wordings
|
|
# drifting apart is how one of them ends up describing the wrong consequence.
|
|
def goal_complete_confirm(goal)
|
|
body = if goal.progress_percent < 100
|
|
t("goals.show.confirm_complete_body_short",
|
|
progress: goal.progress_percent,
|
|
saved: goal.current_balance_money.format(precision: 0),
|
|
target: goal.target_amount_money.format(precision: 0))
|
|
else
|
|
t("goals.show.confirm_complete_body")
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
CustomConfirm.new(
|
|
title: t("goals.show.confirm_complete_title"),
|
|
body: body,
|
|
btn_text: t("goals.show.confirm_complete_cta")
|
|
)
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
# Fixed earmarks on `account` held by goals OTHER than the one being
|
|
# edited, read from a pooled map loaded once per render
|
|
# (Goal.pooled_allocations_for) rather than per account — the form lists
|
|
# every fundable account, so a per-account query is a guaranteed N+1.
|
|
#
|
|
# Excluding the current goal is what makes the warning trustworthy:
|
|
# `Account#goal_earmarked_total` counts every goal, so reopening a goal
|
|
# that earmarks 5,000 on a 6,000 account would leave 1,000 of apparent
|
|
# headroom, and re-entering the same 5,000 would trip a message although
|
|
# nothing changed.
|
|
#
|
|
# Whole-balance links carry a nil allocated_amount and contribute zero:
|
|
# they reserve no fixed slice. That is the right reading here — what they
|
|
# do claim is guarded separately, at write time, by GoalAccount.
|
|
def earmarked_by_other_goals(account, pooled:, current_goal: nil)
|
|
other_goal_rows(account, pooled, current_goal).sum { |row| row[:allocated_amount].to_d }
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
# A whole-account link carries a nil allocation, so it contributes zero to
|
|
# the sum above — "nothing else claims this account" and "another goal
|
|
# claims all of it" look identical from that figure alone. They are not:
|
|
# the second refuses a blank allocation at the door
|
|
# (`GoalAccount#whole_account_link_must_be_exclusive`).
|
|
def whole_account_claimed_by_other_goals?(account, pooled:, current_goal: nil)
|
|
other_goal_rows(account, pooled, current_goal).any? { |row| row[:allocated_amount].nil? }
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
private
|
|
def other_goal_rows(account, pooled, current_goal)
|
|
(pooled[account.id] || [])
|
|
.reject { |row| current_goal&.persisted? && row[:goal_id] == current_goal.id }
|
|
end
|
|
end
|