feat(iOS): Create explainer modifier #1290
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
e391186 to
4fd05f6
Compare
KaylaBrady
approved these changes
Sep 3, 2025
Collaborator
KaylaBrady
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Appreciate you breaking this out!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Ticket: Prep for iOS Move StopDetailsViewModel to shared code
The iOS StopDetailsVM handles the explainer state currently, and this seemed like an easy and discrete thing to split out into a separate PR. Moving it into basic view state doesn't require adding this modifier, but it seemed more concise and reusable. Now the state is managed entirely in TripDetails.
iOS
- [ ] If you added any user-facing strings on iOS, are they included in Localizable.xcstrings?- [ ] Add temporary machine translations, marked "Needs Review"Testing
I started trying to add a couple simple tests, but it looks like testing fullScreenCover requires jumping through a few ViewInspector hoops that I don't know if it's worth bothering with.