Removed Debouncing mechanism

[gouri-panda]

Fixes #3608

It removes debounce mechanics in order to have a better user experince.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (bdbfe2f) 48.77% compared to head (3eda149) 48.75%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #3612      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     48.77%   48.75%   -0.02%     
+ Complexity     1093     1091       -2     
============================================
  Files           285      285              
  Lines         10567    10556      -11     
  Branches       1413     1413              
============================================
- Hits           5154     5147       -7     
+ Misses         4573     4569       -4     
  Partials        840      840              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[kelson42]

@gouri-panda We are sure this does not reintroduce new crash scenario? As well, I see you have removed the whole test, does that mean we have no test anymore for the suggestions?

[gouri-panda]

@kelson42 The test was specifically for the testing of debounce test to make sure we're not searching after a certain period of time.

[MohitMaliFtechiz]

@gouri-panda I have tested it and it searches results a little faster, I have tried with both codes with slow/fast typing, and without debouncing it is 500ms faster to fetch the results.

@gouri-panda We are sure this does not reintroduce a new crash scenario.

@kelson42 We should make sure about this, However, on my device, there is no crash with this new code. @gouri-panda had faced a crashing issue on his device. @gouri-panda have you faced the crashing issue on your devices after this fix?

Apart from this, @gouri-panda if we are going to remove the debouncing from our search functionality, we should remove all the code related to it.

[kelson42]

@MohitMaliFtechiz please remove addional code if needed

[kelson42]

@MohitMaliFtechiz what’s up here? This is prio PR to handle.

[MohitMaliFtechiz]

@kelson42 We have removed unnecessary debouncing code from the search functionality, and modified the test cases accordingly.

@kelson42 We should make sure about this, However, on my device, there is no crash with this new code. @gouri-panda had faced a crashing issue on his device. @gouri-panda have you faced the crashing issue on your devices after this fix?

@gouri-panda your feedback is important here.

[gouri-panda]

@MohitMaliFtechiz @kelson42 Sorry for late reply! Yes, the changed code looks good to me! @MohitMaliFtechiz I can't see the new crash scenario. But if we have a chance to test this on the low-end devices. then that would be perfect. Also, we should write various test case scenarios to ensure they pass what we intended.

[MohitMaliFtechiz]

@MohitMaliFtechiz @kelson42 Sorry for late reply! Yes, the changed code looks good to me! @MohitMaliFtechiz I can't see the new crash scenario. But if we have a chance to test this on the low-end devices. then that would be perfect. Also, we should write various test case scenarios to ensure they pass what we intended.

@gouri-panda Thanks for confirming that you have not been able to reproduce the crash scenario, i have tested it on the lower API level emulators and it did not crash. Writing the test cases is a good idea, we have a ticket for this #3596.

@kelson42 We should implement #3596 in this PR, or we should do it separately. Apart from the test cases, the PR code LGTM.