76855/added compute function by abbasifaizan70 · Pull Request #77827 · Expensify/App

abbasifaizan70 · 2025-12-17T00:29:13Z

Explanation of Change

This PR will make sure to use function (compute) for computing report names from formula templates.

Fixed Issues

Tests

Prerequisites

Create or use an existing Team or Corporate workspace (not a personal workspace)
Go to Settings > Workspaces > [Your Workspace] > Report Fields
Set up a custom Report Title formula. Examples to test:
- {report:type} - {report:total}
- Report {report:id} - {report:policyname}
- {report:status} Report for {report:workspacename}

Formula	Expected Optimistic Result
`{report:type}`	"Expense Report"
`{report:id}`	Base62 encoded report ID (e.g., "R0000008M0kX")
`{report:total}`	Formatted amount (e.g., "25.00")
`{report:policyname}`	Workspace name
`{report:workspacename}`	Workspace name
`{report:status}`	"Open" or "Submitted"
`{report:currency}`	Currency code (e.g., "USD")

Test Case 1: Create New Expense in Workspace

Open the Expensify app
Click the + button (FAB)
Select Submit Expense
Choose a workspace that has a custom report title formula
Fill in the expense details (amount, merchant, etc.)
Submit the expense
The expense report should be created with the optimistic report name computed using the formula (e.g., "Expense Report - $25.00" instead of the default "[Workspace] owes $25.00")

Test Case 2: Offline Mode

Turn on Airplane mode / disconnect from internet
Create a new expense in a workspace with custom report title formula
The report name should still be computed optimistically using the formula
Reconnect to internet
The report name should remain correct after sync

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

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

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Test 01

Test 02

Screen.Recording.2025-12-17.at.7.58.13.PM.mov

codecov · 2025-12-17T00:37:26Z

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/libs/Formula.ts	`86.57% <ø> (+0.47%)`	⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts	`67.29% <75.86%> (+0.26%)`	⬆️
src/libs/ReportUtils.ts	`72.56% <15.38%> (-0.52%)`	⬇️
... and 11 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2025-12-17T15:03:40Z

@eVoloshchak 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]

JmillsExpensify

Part of an on-going product initiative.

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

eVoloshchak · 2025-12-28T18:01:15Z

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
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

Screen.Recording.2025-12-28.at.19.40.37.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2025-12-28.at.19.41.29.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2025-12-28.at.19.18.11.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-12-28.at.19.20.44.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-01-08.at.11.18.28.mov

eVoloshchak

LGTM!

neil-marcellini

Looks pretty good, thanks. I have a few comments.

I notice that we're not passing in any data for the new reportTransactions parameters. As a result if we're building an optimistic expense report as a result of creating a new expense, such as with requestMoney and getMoneyRequestInformation, then the computed formula would be inaccurate if it references data on the transaction, right? For example {report:startdate} and the transaction has it's date set to one in the past. Can you please manually test that case?

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

abbasifaizan70 · 2025-12-30T22:54:07Z

Looks pretty good, thanks. I have a few comments.

I notice that we're not passing in any data for the new reportTransactions parameters. As a result if we're building an optimistic expense report as a result of creating a new expense, such as with requestMoney and getMoneyRequestInformation, then the computed formula would be inaccurate if it references data on the transaction, right? For example {report:startdate} and the transaction has it's date set to one in the past. Can you please manually test that case?

The compute function is correctly computing the {report:startdate} formula even for transactions with past dates.

neil-marcellini

Thanks for the updates, but you still need to pass the reportTransactions to buildOptimisticExpenseReport for this to work optimistically.

You didn't test offline, so that's not properly testing the optimistic handling. Here's proof it doesn't work.

2025-12-31_13-45-29.mp4

Also, given that we're adding this new optimistic behavior with this PR, and it's not fully implemented, can we please only compute the name optimistically if the user is on the beta CUSTOM_REPORT_NAMES?

abbasifaizan70 · 2026-01-01T00:54:37Z

Thanks for the updates, but you still need to pass the reportTransactions to buildOptimisticExpenseReport for this to work optimistically.

You didn't test offline, so that's not properly testing the optimistic handling. Here's proof it doesn't work.

2025-12-31_13-45-29.mp4
Also, given that we're adding this new optimistic behavior with this PR, and it's not fully implemented, can we please only compute the name optimistically if the user is on the beta CUSTOM_REPORT_NAMES?

@neil-marcellini Thanks for the feedback! I've made the following changes:

Added beta gate - The optimistic report name computation is now only performed if the user is on the CUSTOM_REPORT_NAMES beta.
Removed reportTransactions from buildOptimisticEmptyReport - Since an empty report won't have transactions.

Regarding passing reportTransactions to buildOptimisticExpenseReport - should I update the call sites in IOU.ts to pass the optimistic transaction data in this PR, or would you prefer that to be done in a follow-up PR? There are several call sites that would need to be updated.

neil-marcellini

Your last batch of updates looks good.

Regarding passing reportTransactions to buildOptimisticExpenseReport - should I update the call sites in IOU.ts to pass the optimistic transaction data in this PR, or would you prefer that to be done in a follow-up PR? There are several call sites that would need to be updated.

Yes, please do that here. It feels required for the PR to be a meaningful change. I also don't like adding a new parameter that is unused.

…asifaizan70/Expensify into 76855/added-compute-function

abbasifaizan70 · 2026-01-01T20:15:54Z

@neil-marcellini I updated. Please have a look.

neil-marcellini

Thanks for this. I didn't realize that the optimistic transaction was generated after the report, so that does make it harder. I like what you did with building a minimal transaction, but it looks like some fields are missing. Please be sure to test thoroughly.

Also, pls write more descriptive commit messages. Lmk when it's ready for the next review.

src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts

…tation - Add MinimalTransaction type in Formula.ts with Pick<Transaction, ...> including: transactionID, reportID, created, amount, currency, merchant, pendingAction - Update buildMinimalTransactionForFormula to accept reportID and merchant params - Generate expense report ID upfront at all call sites for proper transaction matching - Pass merchant field to enable isPartialTransaction() checks in formula computation

abbasifaizan70 · 2026-01-03T00:33:36Z

@neil-marcellini Done! Added reportID and merchant to the minimal transaction, and created a MinimalTransaction type in Formula.ts. Also generating the report ID upfront now so the transaction's reportID matches the new expense report. Let me know if anything else needs adjusting!

neil-marcellini

Just a few more small changes, then we need the C+ @eVoloshchak to test again.

src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts

src/libs/Formula.ts

abbasifaizan70 · 2026-01-06T14:31:34Z

@neil-marcellini @eVoloshchak resolved feedbacks.

eVoloshchak

Re-tested offline and online cases, works well

OSBotify · 2026-01-12T15:40:31Z

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

OSBotify · 2026-01-13T03:38:50Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/neil-marcellini in version: 9.3.0-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-01-14T02:55:09Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/francoisl in version: 9.3.0-8 🚀

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

hoangzinh · 2026-01-27T15:33:48Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

-    const optimisticReportName = populateOptimisticReportFormula(titleReportField?.defaultValue ?? CONST.POLICY.DEFAULT_REPORT_NAME_PATTERN, optimisticEmptyReport, policy);
-    optimisticEmptyReport.reportName = optimisticReportName;
+    // Only compute optimistic report name if the user is on the CUSTOM_REPORT_NAMES beta
+    if (Permissions.isBetaEnabled(CONST.BETAS.CUSTOM_REPORT_NAMES, allBetas)) {


Hi @abbasifaizan70, could you explain why we don't maintain the old logic to support accounts that haven't been granted CONST.BETAS.CUSTOM_REPORT_NAMES?

I mean:

if (Permissions.isBetaEnabled(CONST.BETAS.CUSTOM_REPORT_NAMES, allBetas)) { // Your new function } else { // populateOptimisticReportFormula function }

Hi @hoangzinh,

You're absolutely right! We should maintain backward compatibility for users who aren't on the CUSTOM_REPORT_NAMES beta. Currently, those users won't get any optimistic report name computation, which is a regression from the previous behavior.

I'll update the code to add a fallback to populateOptimisticReportFormula for users not on the beta, so they continue to get optimistic report names using the existing logic. This will ensure:

Users on the beta get the improved compute function with better formula handling

Users not on the beta continue to get optimistic report names via populateOptimisticReportFormula (maintaining existing behavior)

I'll apply this change to all three locations:

buildOptimisticExpenseReport in ReportUtils.ts

buildOptimisticEmptyReport in ReportUtils.ts

convertIOUReportToExpenseReport in Report.ts

Thanks for catching this!

I created a PR to handle this issue. Let me know if it works.

@eVoloshchak @neil-marcellini

@nkdengineer also raised a PR but it does not completely adding check for old users.

@eVoloshchak @hoangzinh @neil-marcellini

@abbasifaizan70 just wanna double check, is @nkdengineer's approach correct? I'm unsure about this one

Since it's applied for all users now, we can remove this permission check.

@neil-marcellini let me know about your thinking.

76855: Optimistically compute report names on creation

1fa3852

melvin-bot bot assigned abbasifaizan70 Dec 17, 2025

removed dependency cycle issue

a41683a

abbasifaizan70 force-pushed the 76855/added-compute-function branch from e2e3588 to a41683a Compare December 17, 2025 00:46

Merge branch 'Expensify:main' into 76855/added-compute-function

df7bb1e

abbasifaizan70 marked this pull request as ready for review December 17, 2025 15:03

abbasifaizan70 requested review from a team as code owners December 17, 2025 15:03

melvin-bot bot requested review from JmillsExpensify and eVoloshchak December 17, 2025 15:03

melvin-bot bot removed request for a team December 17, 2025 15:03

abbasifaizan70 mentioned this pull request Dec 17, 2025

[Due for payment 2026-01-29] Optimistically compute report names on creation #76855

Closed

JmillsExpensify previously approved these changes Dec 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

eVoloshchak mentioned this pull request Dec 19, 2025

Use compute function for report name in convertIOUReportToExpenseReport #77928

Merged

53 tasks

eVoloshchak reviewed Dec 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

eVoloshchak suggested changes Dec 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

Resolved feedback

131a28f

abbasifaizan70 dismissed JmillsExpensify’s stale review via 131a28f December 24, 2025 23:00

eVoloshchak approved these changes Dec 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from neil-marcellini December 28, 2025 18:45

neil-marcellini requested changes Dec 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

neil-marcellini reviewed Dec 29, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Resolved feedbacK

8b6869c

Fixed prettier issue

863443a

neil-marcellini requested changes Dec 31, 2025

View reviewed changes

abbasifaizan70 and others added 2 commits January 1, 2026 05:56

Resolved feedbacks

324e129

Merge branch 'Expensify:main' into 76855/added-compute-function

cb624d5

neil-marcellini requested changes Jan 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

abbasifaizan70 added 3 commits January 2, 2026 00:27

resolved feedbacK

690f9b8

Merge branch '76855/added-compute-function' of https://github.com/abb…

e8d0b7c

…asifaizan70/Expensify into 76855/added-compute-function

fixed prettier issues

ad83267

neil-marcellini requested changes Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts Show resolved Hide resolved

neil-marcellini requested changes Jan 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

src/libs/Formula.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

abbasifaizan70 and others added 3 commits January 6, 2026 06:14

resolved feedbacks

e398dc8

Merge branch 'main' into 76855/added-compute-function

3b417c5

fixed link issues

154257b

neil-marcellini approved these changes Jan 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

neil-marcellini requested a review from eVoloshchak January 6, 2026 14:49

eVoloshchak approved these changes Jan 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from neil-marcellini January 8, 2026 10:29

neil-marcellini merged commit 68c8f5c into Expensify:main Jan 12, 2026
30 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-01-13 #79402

Closed

91 tasks

mitarachim mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2026

Expense - Report title does not follow workspace report title when created offline #79405

Closed

7 tasks

jponikarchuk mentioned this pull request Jan 13, 2026

Workspace - Report name works just for a second and changes briefly in online mode #79441

Closed

7 tasks

truph01 mentioned this pull request Jan 24, 2026

[Awaiting checklist] [Due for payment 2026-02-25][$250] Expense-Expense report title edit page is blank in offline #80379

Closed

7 tasks

hoangzinh reviewed Jan 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

MelvinBot mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2026

[$250] Report - Report status {report:status} title doesn't affect the Employee side #76215

Closed

8 tasks

Conversation

abbasifaizan70 commented Dec 17, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Prerequisites

Test Case 1: Create New Expense in Workspace

Test Case 2: Offline Mode

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Test 01

Test 02

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Dec 17, 2025 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 17, 2025

Uh oh!

JmillsExpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

eVoloshchak commented Dec 28, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

eVoloshchak left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

neil-marcellini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

abbasifaizan70 commented Dec 30, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

neil-marcellini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

abbasifaizan70 commented Jan 1, 2026

Uh oh!

neil-marcellini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

abbasifaizan70 commented Jan 1, 2026

Uh oh!

neil-marcellini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

abbasifaizan70 commented Jan 3, 2026

Uh oh!

neil-marcellini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

abbasifaizan70 commented Jan 6, 2026

Uh oh!

eVoloshchak left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 12, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 13, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 14, 2026

Uh oh!

abbasifaizan70 commented Dec 17, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 17, 2025 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

eVoloshchak commented Dec 28, 2025 •

edited

Loading

abbasifaizan70 commented Dec 30, 2025 •

edited

Loading

abbasifaizan70 Jan 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading