Its possible to nominate a slashed or deregistered op

[marc-aurele-besner]

User description

Its possible to nominate a slashed or deregistered op

Following some change in status the logic was broken, I improved the logic

---

PR Type

enhancement, bug fix

---

Description

• Enhanced the logic for excluding actions in the NominationsTable and OperatorsList components by using enums for operator status and pending actions.
• Added pending_action field to the operator type in GraphQL queries to improve data handling.
• Introduced new enums in constants/staking.ts to standardize operator and nominator statuses and actions.
• Updated filter options in constants/tables.ts to use the new OperatorStatus enum.
• Bumped the storage version for table states to ensure compatibility with the updated logic.

---

Changes walkthrough 📝

	Relevant files
Enhancement	staking.ts Add pending_action field to operator type                                explorer/gql/types/staking.ts Added pending_action field to the operator type in NominationsListQuery. +1/-1      NominationsTable.tsx Update action exclusion logic using enums                                explorer/src/components/Staking/NominationsTable.tsx Updated logic to exclude actions based on operator status and pending actions. Replaced string literals with OperatorStatus and OperatorPendingAction enums. +7/-12    OperatorsList.tsx Enhance operator action logic with enums                                  explorer/src/components/Staking/OperatorsList.tsx Updated logic to exclude actions based on operator status and pending actions. Replaced string literals with OperatorStatus and OperatorPendingAction enums. +4/-8      staking.query.ts Include pending_action in operator GraphQL query                  explorer/src/components/Staking/staking.query.ts Added pending_action field to the operator type in GraphQL query. +1/-0      staking.ts Define enums for staking statuses and actions                        explorer/src/constants/staking.ts Introduced new enums for operator and nominator statuses and pending actions. +44/-0    tables.ts Use OperatorStatus enum for filter options                              explorer/src/constants/tables.ts Updated status filter options to use OperatorStatus enum. +3/-1
Configuration changes	tables.ts Update storage version for table states                                    explorer/src/states/tables.ts Bumped storage version from 2 to 3. +1/-1

---

💡 PR-Agent usage:
Comment /help on the PR to get a list of all available PR-Agent tools and their descriptions

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for dev-astral ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	feb2ee0
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/dev-astral/deploys/66d0517b4357d8000828e214
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-838--dev-astral.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[github-actions]

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 3 🔵🔵🔵⚪⚪

🧪 No relevant tests

🔒 No security concerns identified

⚡ Key issues to review Possible Bug The condition if (nominator.operator?.status === OperatorStatus.SLASHED) return <></> may prevent further rendering of components or actions even if there are other valid conditions or data to be processed. This could lead to missing UI elements or functionality. Possible Bug Similar to the issue in NominationsTable.tsx, the condition if (row.original.status === OperatorStatus.SLASHED) return <></> might prematurely stop rendering of components, potentially hiding necessary UI elements or actions.

[github-actions]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Category	Suggestion	Score
Possible issue	Add null checks for nested properties in the NominationsListQuery type Consider adding null checks for nested properties in the NominationsListQuery type to prevent runtime errors when accessing deeply nested properties. explorer/gql/types/staking.ts [7571] -export type NominationsListQuery = { __typename?: 'query_root', nominator_aggregate: { __typename?: 'nominator_aggregate', aggregate?: { __typename?: 'nominator_aggregate_fields', count: number } | null }, nominator: Array<{ __typename?: 'nominator', id: string, account_id: string, domain_id: string, operator_id: string, known_shares: any, known_storage_fee_deposit: any, pending_amount: any, pending_storage_fee_deposit: any, pending_effective_domain_epoch: number, total_withdrawal_amounts: any, total_storage_fee_refund: any, unlock_at_confirmed_domain_block_number: Array<number>, pending_shares: any, pending_storage_fee_refund: any, total_deposits: any, status: string, pending_action: string, created_at: number, updated_at: number, domain?: { __typename?: 'domain', id: string, name: string } | null, operator?: { __typename?: 'operator', id: string, account_id: string, status: string, pending_action: string, current_total_shares: any } | null, deposits: Array<{ __typename?: 'deposit', id: string, amount: any, storage_fee_deposit: any, timestamp: any, extrinsic_hash: string, status: string, created_at: number, staked_at: number, updated_at: number }>, withdrawals: Array<{ __typename?: 'withdrawal', id: string, shares: any, estimated_amount: any, unlocked_amount: any, unlocked_storage_fee: any, timestamp: any, withdraw_extrinsic_hash: string, unlock_extrinsic_hash: string, status: string, created_at: number, ready_at: number, unlocked_at: number, updated_at: number }> }> +export type NominationsListQuery = { __typename?: 'query_root', nominator_aggregate: { __typename?: 'nominator_aggregate', aggregate?: { __typename?: 'nominator_aggregate_fields', count: number } | null }, nominator: Array<{ __typename?: 'nominator', id: string, account_id: string, domain_id: string, operator_id: string, known_shares: any, known_storage_fee_deposit: any, pending_amount: any, pending_storage_fee_deposit: any, pending_effective_domain_epoch: number, total_withdrawal_amounts: any, total_storage_fee_refund: any, unlock_at_confirmed_domain_block_number: Array<number>, pending_shares: any, pending_storage_fee_refund: any, total_deposits: any, status: string, pending_action: string, created_at: number, updated_at: number, domain?: { __typename?: 'domain', id: string, name: string } | null, operator?: { __typename?: 'operator', id: string, account_id: string, status: string, pending_action: string, current_total_shares: any } | null, deposits: Array<{ __typename?: 'deposit', id: string, amount: any, storage_fee_deposit: any, timestamp: any, extrinsic_hash: string, status: string, created_at: number, staked_at: number, updated_at: number }>, withdrawals: Array<{ __typename?: 'withdrawal', id: string, shares: any, estimated_amount: any, unlocked_amount: any, unlocked_storage_fee: any, timestamp: any, withdraw_extrinsic_hash: string, unlock_extrinsic_hash: string, status: string, created_at: number, ready_at: number, unlocked_at: number, updated_at: number }> } | null } Suggestion importance[1-10]: 7 Why: Adding null checks for nested properties in the NominationsListQuery type can help prevent runtime errors when accessing deeply nested properties. This is a good practice for improving code robustness, but it is not addressing a critical issue, hence a moderate score.	7

[clostao]

lgtm