Update SearchPageHeaderInput to display recent search and chats

[Kicu]

Explanation of Change

This PR refactors SearchPageHeaderInput and SearchRouter, to put all (expect contextual search) Router features into the Input on Search results.
Also when cmd+k shortcut is used while on Search Results Page, then we will focus on the Input and not show the Router.

Fixed bugs

• if the query is empty, the first item on the list will also be empty, and will navigate to default search
• focus on android mobile: Use autocomplete on Search Results Header #52568 (comment)
• [VERIFY] check performance regression - Use autocomplete on Search Results Header #52568 (comment)

Other things

1. I was unable to properly fix box height: Use autocomplete on Search Results Header #52568 (comment) The reason is that I believe this is a problem deeper in the SelectionList. I played with different styles, max-heights etc and none of this changed the behavior.
   I'm providing a video which shows that from the perspective of Search list components there is exactly 1 render, which introduces all the items, and there is nothing weird happening with data lengths. Thus the source of the flicker is most likely inside SelectionList, and I'd prefer to not change this list in this PR

flicker with console logs of renders

rec-web-list-flicker.mp4

2. Keyboard navigation will sometimes jump out from suggestions the Search results below. This happens only when we have 1 item in the list, and so I think it should not be a big problem. The source lies much deeper in the code, because `SelectionList` simply always attaches a global keyboard handler for arrows UP/DOWN, and is not ready to work in cases where there are 2 lists. Source: https://github.com/Expensify/App/blob/main/src/components/SelectionList/BaseSelectionList.tsx#L317 This is a bigger problem that should be solved in a separate issue IMO.

Fixed Issues

$ #53126
PROPOSAL:

Tests

• verify that cmd+k will focus Input when on Search results page
• verify that the Input on Search results page has the same items as Router
• verify you can navigate from Search results page to a chat via list items

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same as Tests

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • MacOS: Desktop
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

Android focus bug fix

rec-andr-focus-bug.mp4

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

rec-search-web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

[melvin-bot]

@rojiphil Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[rojiphil]

Reviewing now

[Kicu]

@rojiphil I have pushed 1 additional commit with the changes suggested by @blazejkustra

[rojiphil]

@rojiphil I have pushed 1 additional commit with the changes suggested by @blazejkustra

Thanks @Kicu for the update.

if the query is empty, the first item on the list will also be empty, and will navigate to default search

The above-mentioned case is implemented for Search Results Page but is not there for SearchRouter. In SearchRouter though, the initial focus is on the most recent chat. Further, on clearing the input, the focus moves to the most recent search. Don’t we have to make this consistent with the Search Results Page behavior?
Here is a video demonstrating this:

53198-initialquery-issue.mp4

[Kicu]

Yes you're right, thanks for pointing this out.
Basically two things happened:

• for SearchRouter someone created an issue requesting the functionality of first recent report being focused, and it was implemented
• for Search Results Page we discussed on slack that it would be nice to have the functionality of basically resetting/dropping current query, hence I added the empty first item

I think it makes some sense because if you're on /search page you always have some query and some results, so from there it may be useful to navigate to default search.
Whereas Router can be accessed from anywhere and so the option to clean current query might not (always) make sense there.

But it could be considered confusing. Do you have any thought @luacmartins ?

[luacmartins]

This is an interesting case. I think the empty first item is confusing. I'd just remove it to make it consistent with the router.

[Kicu]

Ok I will remove the empty item, however there was a convo about this here: https://swmansion.slack.com/archives/C06ML6X0W9L/p1732623340138529, and Vit suggested it's confusing for him.

[Kicu]

@rojiphil I added the change suggested by Carlos (no empty item), and fixed newest conflicts with main. I did a rebase instead of merge by mistake - sorry about that.
There was a PR merged that touched both SearchRouter and Input so small things changed there.
Can you take another look?

[luacmartins]

@rojiphil let's prioritize reviewing this PR once you're available

[luacmartins]

Looking really good. I just noticed one small bug.

1. Navigate to a report
2. Open the search router (cmd+k)
3. Notice that Search in... is at the bottom of the list

[luacmartins]

I created an issue for this. Let's remove the comment - #53480

[luacmartins]

LGTM.

[luacmartins]

Awesome job on this one!

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.73-0 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	success ✅
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	failure ❌

[izarutskaya]

Found KI on mWeb only - issue #53783

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.73-8 🚀

platform	result
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖🔄 android HybridApp 🤖🔄	success ✅
🍎🔄 iOS HybridApp 🍎🔄	success ✅

[ikevin127]

This had a regression:

• [HOLD for payment 2024-12-19] Search - Search query "status:" is always "status:all" when the status type is changed #53823

which was confirmed by author in follow-up PR #53859 description.

[rojiphil]

Agree that was a regression. But we addressed multiple issues at once here and there was quite a lot of quality work that went into the PR.
@luacmartins Can we not avoid the penalising clause here and keep the default compensation instead?

[rojiphil]

This had a regression:

@ikevin127 Yeah, and next time, please tag me also for regression issues where I am the original PR reviewer and as mentioned in the C+ Process Doc here. Thanks.

[ikevin127]

Can we not avoid the penalising clause here and keep the default compensation instead?

I concur that we should not avoid the penalty as this would set a precedent for both past / future issues, when the rules are clear on regressions regardless of how many test cases were included in PR description (as long as they were included).

Yeah, and next time, please tag me also for regression issues where I am the original PR reviewer

Sure, I'll try to be more careful next time - hopefully will not get a penalty for this 🤕

[rojiphil]

I concur that we should not avoid the penalty as this would set a precedent for both past / future issues, when the rules are clear on regressions regardless of how many test cases were included in PR description (as long as they were included).

Oh! What I meant is that as per the process, there is a provision to increase the compensation when there is more work involved. And usually, I take this up at the time of payment considering the entire issue holistically.
So, what I meant is to increase the compensation and apply the penalty so that it comes back to the default compensation. My intention was not to avoid the process as I agree that it would then set a precedent.

[ikevin127]

And usually, I take this up at the time of payment considering the entire issue holistically.

So, what I meant is to increase the compensation and apply the penalty so that it comes back to the default compensation.

I don't think it matters how you word it, it's the same thing since you are only asking for increase after the regression was brought to your attention, not before you started the review, considering the entire issue holistically as you said.

Not sure what the procedure is on issues that don't have a set price, as far as I know it's $250 unless an increase was asked for, justfied and granted before starting the PR review (at least that would make sense to me), during issue / proposal review.

Maybe I'm missing something though!

[rojiphil]

@ikevin127 As per the process, I think it's incorrect to say unless an increase was asked for, justfied and granted **before** starting the PR review. Perhaps you missed reading this section and this one too within the C+ process doc.

[luacmartins]

I think it's fine to keep the original amount in this case given the workload for the original issue.

[shubham1206agra]

This change introduced a bug detailed #59552

[ahmedGaber93]

Coming from #59643, We have a case when isSearchTopmostCentralPane is true but user is not on search page, he is in multiple expenses report, which cause no action after CMD + K is pressed

[s77rt]

The autocompleteQueryValue contains filters that shouldn't be passed to the BE report search endpoint as they are irrelevant and causes two identical search values to be treated differently resulting in 2 API calls e.g.

• type:expense status:all group-by:reports ExpenseReportName
• type:expense status:drafts group-by:reports ExpenseReportName

In both queries the report that we are searching for is ExpenseReportName. That's all what we should send to the server and only do it once.

Coming from #60336