Now that we've moved the logic to generate the events data to a model,
and we've got access to the model in the component rendering the chart,
we can render the data inside the chart instead of doing an extra AJAX
request to get the same data.
Originally, this was problaby done this way so the page wouldn't take
several seconds to load while preparing the data for the chart when
there are thousands of dates being displayed. With an AJAX call, the
page would load as fast as usual, and then the chart would render after
a few seconds. However, we can have an even better performance
improvement in this scenario if we use a Set instead of an Array. The
method `Array#include?`, which we were calling for every date in the
data, is much slower that `Set#merge`. So now both the page and the
chart load as fast as expected.
We could also use something like:
```
def add
(...)
shared_keys.push(*collection.keys)
end
def build
(...)
shared_keys.uniq.each do |k|
(...)
end
def shared_keys
@shared_keys ||= []
end
```
Or other approaches to avoid using `Array#include?`. The performance
would be similar to the one we get when using `Set`. We're using a `Set`
because it makes more obvious that `shared_keys` is supposed to contain
unique elements.
We've had some tests failing in the past due to these AJAX requests
being triggered automatically during the tests and no expectations
checking the requests have finished, so now we're reducing the amount of
flaky tests.
We were tracking some events with Ahoy, but in an inconsistent way. For
example, we were tracking when a debate was created, but (probably
accidentally) we were only tracking proposals when they were created
from the management section. For budget investments and their supports,
we weren't using Ahoy events but checking their database tables instead.
And we were only using ahoy events for the charts; for the other stats,
we were using the real data.
While we could actually fix these issues and start tracking events
correctly, existing production data would remain broken because we
didn't track a certain event when it happened. And, besides, why should
we bother, for instance, to track when a debate is created, when we can
instead access that information in the debates table?
There are probably some features related to tracking an event and their
visits, but we weren't using them, and we were storing more user data
than we needed to.
So we're removing the track events, allowing us to simplify the code and
make it more consistent. We aren't removing the `ahoy_events` table in
case existing Consul Democracy installations use it, but we'll remove it
after releasing version 2.2.0 and adding a warning in the release notes.
This change fixes the proposal created chart, since we were only
tracking proposals created in the management section, and opens the
possibility to add more charts in the future using data we didn't track
with Ahoy.
Also note the "Level 2 user Graph" test wasn't testing the graph, so
we're changing it in order to test it. We're also moving it next to the
other graphs test and, since we were tracking the event when we were
confirming the phone, we're renaming to "Level 3 users".
Finally, note that, since we were tracking events when something was
created, we're including the `with_hidden` scope. This is also
consistent with the other stats shown in the admin section as well as
the public stats.
This rule was added in rubocop 1.44.0. It's useful to avoid accidental
`unless !condition` clauses.
Note we aren't replacing `unless zero?` with `if nonzero?` because we
never use `nonzero?`; using it sounds like `if !zero?`.
Replacing `unless any?` with `if none?` is only consistent if we also replace
`unless present?` with `if blank?`, so we're also adding this case. For
consistency, we're also replacing `unless blank?` with `if present?`.
We're also simplifying code dealing with `> 0` conditions in order to
make the code (hopefully) easier to understand.
Also for consistency, we're enabling the `Style/InverseMethods` rule,
which follows a similar idea.
Note we're excluding a few files:
* Configuration files that weren't generated by us
* Migration files that weren't generated by us
* The Gemfile, since it includes an important comment that must be on
the same line as the gem declaration
* The Budget::Stats class, since the heading statistics are a mess and
having shorter lines would require a lot of refactoring
We were very inconsistent regarding these rules.
Personally I prefer no empty lines around blocks, clases, etc... as
recommended by the Ruby style guide [1], and they're the default values
in rubocop, so those are the settings I'm applying.
The exception is the `private` access modifier, since we were leaving
empty lines around it most of the time. That's the default rubocop rule
as well. Personally I don't have a strong preference about this one.
[1] https://rubystyle.guide/#empty-lines-around-bodies
