Skip to content

Conversation

@TMisiukiewicz
Copy link
Contributor

@TMisiukiewicz TMisiukiewicz commented Jul 30, 2025

Explanation of Change

Changelog:

Expensify/react-native-onyx#666
Expensify/react-native-onyx#654
Expensify/react-native-onyx#668

Fixed Issues

$ #67171
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Do not require testing:
Expensify/react-native-onyx#666
Expensify/react-native-onyx#654

For Expensify/react-native-onyx#668:

  1. Open the app
  2. FAB -> Create expense -> Upload an image that is not a receipt
  3. Create expense
  4. Verify the RBR is displayed in the LHN
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

n/a

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."
Same as tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • 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 verified the translation was requested/reviewed 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.js 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.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
ios.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios-web.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web.mov
MacOS: Desktop
desktop.mov

@TMisiukiewicz TMisiukiewicz requested a review from a team as a code owner July 30, 2025 07:11
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from hungvu193 and removed request for a team July 30, 2025 07:11
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jul 30, 2025

@hungvu193 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]

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

⚠️ This PR is possibly changing native code and/or updating libraries, it may cause problems with HybridApp. Please check if any patch updates are required in the HybridApp repo and run an AdHoc build to verify that HybridApp will not break. Ask Contributor Plus for help if you are not sure how to handle this. ⚠️

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

I'll test it today!

@TMisiukiewicz
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mountiny could you rerun the test jobs? I see a lot of weird fails here

FAIL tests/ui/LHNItemsPresence.tsx
  ● Test suite failed to run

    A jest worker process (pid=2618) was terminated by another process: signal=SIGTERM, exitCode=null. Operating system logs may contain more information on why this occurred.

      at ChildProcessWorker._onExit (node_modules/jest-runner/node_modules/jest-worker/build/workers/ChildProcessWorker.js:370:23)

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

Restarted

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

🤔 Still failing. I think you can try to merge main again @TMisiukiewicz

@TMisiukiewicz
Copy link
Contributor Author

TMisiukiewicz commented Jul 31, 2025

Still happening. Might be related to Node version bump? 🤔 Expensify/react-native-onyx#654 Nah it's already up to date with E/App

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah, Both of E/App and Onyx are using the same node version 20.19.3

@TMisiukiewicz
Copy link
Contributor Author

Alright I found the issue, we are getting some infinite loops in the tests that use derived values with selectors. Investigating this now

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

@TMisiukiewicz all tests were passed 🎉

From the code changes, I can see you created function for selector. I believe this is to avoid rerender since inline function will recreate the function every time the component rerenders so our memorized selector inside useOnxy won't need to be recalculated.

But I believe we have tons of other places that are using inline selector. Do you think we should fix it everywhere else?

@TMisiukiewicz
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hungvu193 I was able to spot the problem - useSidebarOrderedReports needed a stable reference of a selector to avoid infinite loops. Without stable reference, memoized selectors are recreated on every render. Looking at the codebase, we have 154 occurencies of inline selectors, so I think to get the best results from memoization, we should think about a strategy of moving to stable references of selectors whenever possible:

  1. Moving all at once in separate PR
  2. Creating an ESLint rule to warn about inline selectors and force to create a stable one on lint changed

I also found out an issue when I work in the import mode with Jason state on web. The app hangs on splash screen, but I don't see anything looping in the logs. Whenever I try this on any account in regular mode, everything works fine 🤔 Could we run an adhoc build for further testing?

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

yeah. Let's create a test build and see if we can find any issues. If we find any critical issue related to performance. I'm afraid that we should refactor all the inline selector in this PR.

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

@mountiny Could you trigger a build here? 😄

@TMisiukiewicz
Copy link
Contributor Author

I just noticed the infinite splash in imported mode happens also on main

@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

Reviewer Checklist

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible 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 checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: HybridApp
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: HybridApp
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (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
    • 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 verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • 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
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • 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.
  • For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this 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.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp
Android: mWeb Chrome
mchrome.mov
iOS: HybridApp
ios.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Safari.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Chrome.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Desktop.mov

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from mountiny July 31, 2025 15:59
@hungvu193
Copy link
Contributor

hungvu193 commented Jul 31, 2025

All yours @mountiny.

Also, in order to take advantage of this onyx enhancement, we need to refactor all the current inline-selector into function.
Please check this and this comment.

Copy link
Contributor

@mountiny mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks! I think these should be quite safe to do in terms of regressions so maybe Callstack handled them in couple PRs and then we add ESLint rule so more inline selectors cannot be added? @TMisiukiewicz

@mountiny mountiny merged commit bb3e090 into Expensify:main Aug 4, 2025
27 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Aug 4, 2025

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

@TMisiukiewicz
Copy link
Contributor Author

TMisiukiewicz commented Aug 4, 2025

@mountiny I already have a branch where I migrated ~70% of the unstable selectors to see if there's a perf impact of such change and I also have some WIP Eslint rule so it should be easy to achieve. I think I can simply cherry pick a couple of commits based on my current work replacing a couple of most commonly used selectors, and create separate PRs for them. The rest can be forced by the rule and migrated by Callstack or the community. Second way is finishing the work on the branch and going with all in one PR, but it sounds like a lot of testing effort. Wdyt?

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

mountiny commented Aug 4, 2025

I am ok splitting this up to multiple PRs, just want to make sure we add a clear guidelines and explanation around this please

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 4, 2025

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.89-1 🚀

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

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 6, 2025

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 9.1.89-21 🚀

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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants