Fix(Card Browser): ANR on using scrollbar

[ShaanNarendran]

Purpose / Description

ANR when the scrollbar was dragged or tapped in larger collections, arose due to the addition of pr #19980

• Enhancement (Card Browser): Tap and drag scrollbar #19980

Fixes

• Fixes The scrollbar can cause lag #20173

Approach

I deleted the previous delta based logic implemented and let the new function handle dragging and tapping which doesn't cause ANRs, for extra optimisation added a scrolltopositionwithoffset.

How Has This Been Tested?

Tested the scrolling with a deck of 100k cards and found no issue on rapid scrolling for 30 seconds along with taps throughout the browser

Checklist

Please, go through these checks before submitting the PR.

• You have a descriptive commit message with a short title (first line, max 50 chars).
• You have commented your code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• You have performed a self-review of your own code
• UI changes: include screenshots of all affected screens (in particular showing any new or changed strings)
• UI Changes: You have tested your change using the Google Accessibility Scanner

[david-allison]

the new function

Please clarify this

---

In general, if you can list 'reverted X', then name the commit which is in HEAD, as this makes it easier to understand what was reverted, and what was fixed forward

I believe the commit is: ca95728

[ShaanNarendran]

the new function

Please clarify this

Ah, by new function I meant the overriding of onTouchEvent which I had done for the main issue of tap and drag, should've phrased it better oops. Will edit the commit message now.

[ShaanNarendran]

In general, if you can list 'reverted X', then name the commit which is in HEAD, as this makes it easier to understand what was reverted, and what was fixed forward

I believe the commit is: ca95728

Would I not have to mention 3c0b2bb since I removed the onTouchListener introduced in that commit, wouldn't it be better to write 'Reverts the onTouchListener introduced in 3c0b2bb'? I could be confusing the meaning of revert here so I just wanted to clarify.
Edit: 'Reverts ca95728' also seems right since introducing that pr is what caused the issue, so I suppose that's more appropriate like you said.

[ShaanNarendran]

Not sure if the new commit description works, but it made sense like this in my head