Fix challenge reward sort

[faridsalau]

Description

Messed up the sort in #11606, this fixes it

How Has This Been Tested?

npm run web:stage cards should be sorted as listed in the comments in this diff

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: dabe74c

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[faridsalau]

constplayCountOrder=[ChallengeName.PlayCount250,ChallengeName.PlayCount1000,ChallengeName.PlayCount10000]constHIGH_PRIORITY=0constLOW_PRIORITY=1constgetSortKey=(challenge: OptimisticUserChallenge,id: ChallengeRewardID)=>{constclaimablePriority=challenge.claimableAmount>0 ? HIGH_PRIORITY : LOW_PRIORITYconstnewAndNotDisbursedPriority=isNewChallenge(challenge.challenge_id)&&challenge.state!=='disbursed'
? HIGH_PRIORITY
: LOW_PRIORITYconstdisbursedPriority=challenge.state==='disbursed' ? LOW_PRIORITY : HIGH_PRIORITY// Assigns a numeric index for play count challenges (e.g., PlayCount250 = 0, PlayCount1000 = 1).// Non-play-count challenges get -1, ensuring they sort before play count challenges when other priorities are equal.constplayCountIndex=isPlayCountChallenge(id)
? playCountOrder.indexOf(id)
: -1// Returns an array of four numbers representing the sort priorities in order of importance.return[claimablePriority,newAndNotDisbursedPriority,disbursedPriority,playCountIndex]}exportconstmakeOptimisticChallengeSortComparator=(userChallenges: Partial<Record<ChallengeRewardID,OptimisticUserChallenge>>): ((id1: ChallengeRewardID,id2: ChallengeRewardID)=>number)=>{return(id1,id2)=>{constuserChallenge1=userChallenges[id1]constuserChallenge2=userChallenges[id2]if(!userChallenge1||!userChallenge2){return0}constkey1=getSortKey(userChallenge1,id1)constkey2=getSortKey(userChallenge2,id2)for(leti=0;i<key1.length;i++){if(key1[i]<key2[i])return-1if(key1[i]>key2[i])return1}return0}}

this is also an option. i think this is a bit easier to digest imo. the array returned in getSortKey key is in priority order. both sort the same

[dharit-tan]

this might get weird with aggregate challenges. why not use the claimable amount logic like above?

[dharit-tan]

oh bc those should already be handled. nvm