fix: update incorrect memo structure key in sage300 advanced settings payload

[JustARatherRidiculouslyLongUsername]

Clickup

https://app.clickup.com/t/86cxd612w

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Refactor
  • Renamed memo_structure property to expense_memo_structure in Sage 300 advanced settings model and fixture
  • Updated related method references to use the new property name
  • Ensured consistent naming across model and methods

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This pull request focuses on renaming the memo_structure property to expense_memo_structure across multiple files in the Sage300 advanced settings model and fixture. The changes involve updating the property name in type definitions, method implementations, and response objects to ensure consistent terminology. The core functionality remains unchanged, with only the naming convention being modified.

Changes

File	Change Summary
src/app/core/models/sage300/sage300-configuration/sage300-advanced-settings.model.ts	Renamed memo_structure to expense_memo_structure in type definitions and methods
src/app/integrations/sage300/sage300-shared/fixture.ts	Updated sage300AdvancedSettingResponse object to use expense_memo_structure

Possibly related PRs

• No strongly related PRs identified based on the provided information.

Suggested labels

size/XS

Poem

🐰 A Rabbit's Rename Refrain 🐰

From memo to expense, a subtle shift,
Renaming structures with linguistic drift,
Code flows smooth, no logic astray,
Just words dancing in their new array,
A tiny change, yet precise and bright! 🔍

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between aefcef5 and 0e4dae8.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• src/app/core/models/sage300/sage300-configuration/sage300-advanced-settings.model.ts (3 hunks)
• src/app/integrations/sage300/sage300-shared/fixture.ts (1 hunks)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)

• GitHub Check: unit-test

🔇 Additional comments (6)

src/app/core/models/sage300/sage300-configuration/sage300-advanced-settings.model.ts (4)

6-6: LGTM! Type definition updated correctly.

The property rename from memo_structure to expense_memo_structure in the Sage300AdvancedSetting type is consistent with the PR objective.

---

26-26: LGTM! Form mapping updated correctly.

The property access has been updated to use expense_memo_structure while maintaining the internal form control name as 'memoStructure'.

---

36-36: LGTM! Payload creation updated correctly.

The property name in the payload has been updated to expense_memo_structure while maintaining the internal form control access as 'memoStructure'.

---

6-6: Verify all occurrences of the property name change.

Let's ensure we haven't missed any occurrences of memo_structure in the codebase.

Also applies to: 26-26, 36-36

✅ Verification successful

Property name change is correctly implemented ✅

The renaming from memo_structure to expense_memo_structure is consistently implemented across all Sage300-related files. This change aligns with similar implementations in other integrations like QBD and Business Central, which also use the expense_memo_structure property name.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining instances of memo_structure
rg -i "memo_structure" --type ts

# Search for new property name to verify consistent usage
rg -i "expense_memo_structure" --type ts

Length of output: 13824

src/app/integrations/sage300/sage300-shared/fixture.ts (2)

75-75: LGTM! Test fixture updated correctly.

The property rename from memo_structure to expense_memo_structure in the test fixture is consistent with the model changes.

---

75-75: Verify test coverage for the property name change.

Let's ensure all test files are updated to use the new property name.

✅ Verification successful

Test files are already using the correct property name

All test files are correctly using expense_memo_structure. No updates to test files are needed.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for any remaining test cases using the old property name
rg -i "memo_structure" --type spec --type test

# Search for test cases using the new property name
rg -i "expense_memo_structure" --type spec --type test

Length of output: 159

---

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Search for test files containing memo_structure
rg -i "memo_structure" -g "*.{spec,test}.{ts,js}" -C 2

# Search for test files containing expense_memo_structure
rg -i "expense_memo_structure" -g "*.{spec,test}.{ts,js}" -C 2

Length of output: 7033

---

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[github-actions]

Unit Test Coverage	%	values
Statements	33.22%	( 4119 / 12398 )
Branches	26.6%	( 1179 / 4432 )
Functions	25.75%	( 893 / 3467 )
Lines	33.4%	( 4053 / 12133 )