Skip to content

[No QA] Refactor: Extract confirmReadyToOpenApp effect into reusable hook#81618

Merged
MariaHCD merged 10 commits intomainfrom
vit-refactor-confirmReadyToOpenApp
Feb 10, 2026
Merged

[No QA] Refactor: Extract confirmReadyToOpenApp effect into reusable hook#81618
MariaHCD merged 10 commits intomainfrom
vit-refactor-confirmReadyToOpenApp

Conversation

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

@mountiny mountiny commented Feb 6, 2026 •
edited by melvin-bot bot
Loading

Explanation of Change

This PR extracts the confirmReadyToOpenApp() effect from DomainInitialPage into a focused, reusable custom hook called useConfirmReadyToOpenApp.

Why this change:

  • The existing code violates the CLEAN-REACT-PATTERNS-4 rule by mixing unrelated effects (data fetching + app lifecycle) in the same component
  • The confirmReadyToOpenApp() pattern is duplicated across 10+ pages - this creates a reusable hook that can be adopted by other pages
  • Extracting to a named hook makes the code self-documenting and easier to maintain

What changed:

  1. Created src/hooks/useConfirmReadyToOpenApp.ts - a focused hook that signals the app is ready to open
  2. Updated DomainInitialPage.tsx to use the new hook instead of an inline useEffect
  3. Added unit tests for the new hook

No behavioral changes - the refactored code executes identically at runtime. This is purely a code quality improvement.

Fixed Issues

$ #81762

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console
  • Verify the hook is called on component mount by running the new unit tests
  • Verify DomainInitialPage loads correctly and displays domain menu items
  • Verify navigation to domain sub-pages (Members, Admins, SAML) works correctly
# Run the new unit tests
npm test -- useConfirmReadyToOpenApp

Offline tests

N/A - This change does not affect offline behavior. The confirmReadyToOpenApp function resolves a Promise that gates API calls, and this behavior is unchanged.

QA Steps

// [No QA] - This is a code refactoring with no user-visible changes. The functionality is identical before and after the change.

  • 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
  • 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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 new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
    • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
    • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
  • 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

N/A - No UI changes (code refactoring only)

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A - No UI changes (code refactoring only)

iOS: Native

N/A - No UI changes (code refactoring only)

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A - No UI changes (code refactoring only)

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A - No UI changes (code refactoring only)

Made with Cursor

@mountiny @cursoragent
refactor: Extract confirmReadyToOpenApp effect into reusable hook
4dcc65c 
This extracts the confirmReadyToOpenApp() effect from DomainInitialPage
into a focused, reusable custom hook called useConfirmReadyToOpenApp.

The existing code violated CLEAN-REACT-PATTERNS-4 by mixing unrelated
effects (data fetching + app lifecycle) in the same component. This
pattern is also duplicated across 10+ pages.

Changes:
- Add src/hooks/useConfirmReadyToOpenApp.ts
- Update DomainInitialPage to use the new hook
- Add unit tests for the hook

No behavioral changes - the refactored code executes identically.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
mountiny and others added 2 commits February 5, 2026 17:06
@mountiny @cursoragent
refactor: Adopt useConfirmReadyToOpenApp hook in 4 more pages
af205ba 
This refactors the following pages to use the new useConfirmReadyToOpenApp
hook, eliminating duplicated useEffect patterns:

- SearchPage
- HomePage
- WorkspaceInitialPage
- SidebarLinks

No behavioral changes - all pages execute the same logic at mount time.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@mountiny @cursoragent
style: Sort imports with prettier
cc2209d 
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 6, 2026 •
edited by github-actions bot
Loading

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/hooks/useConfirmReadyToOpenApp.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/pages/Search/SearchPage.tsx 23.85% <100.00%> (-0.14%) ⬇️
src/pages/domain/DomainInitialPage.tsx 0.00% <ø> (ø)
src/pages/home/HomePage.tsx 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/pages/inbox/sidebar/SidebarLinks.tsx 91.30% <100.00%> (-0.37%) ⬇️
src/pages/workspace/WorkspaceInitialPage.tsx 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

@mountiny mountiny marked this pull request as ready for review February 6, 2026 22:40
@mountiny mountiny requested review from a team as code owners February 6, 2026 22:40
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from MariaHCD and joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team February 6, 2026 22:40
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 6, 2026

@MariaHCD 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]

1 similar comment
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 6, 2026

@MariaHCD 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]

@mountiny mountiny requested a review from eh2077 February 7, 2026 00:23
@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor Author

mountiny commented Feb 7, 2026

@eh2077 can you please review and test?

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor Author

mountiny commented Feb 7, 2026

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector
Copy link

chatgpt-codex-connector bot commented Feb 7, 2026

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Swish!

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor

eh2077 commented Feb 7, 2026

Yes, I'll review it today

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor

eh2077 commented Feb 8, 2026 •
edited
Loading

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.2026-02-08.at.9.38.37.PM.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2026-02-08.at.9.35.30.PM.mov
iOS: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2026-02-08.at.9.38.05.PM.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-02-08.at.9.36.24.PM.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-02-08.at.9.34.32.PM.mov

eh2077
eh2077 approved these changes Feb 8, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@eh2077 eh2077 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

looks good!

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from marcochavezf February 8, 2026 13:42
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 8, 2026

@marcochavezf 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]

@joekaufmanexpensify
Copy link
Contributor

joekaufmanexpensify commented Feb 9, 2026

No product review needed

@joekaufmanexpensify joekaufmanexpensify removed their request for review February 9, 2026 13:57
@mountiny @eh2077
Update src/pages/home/HomePage.tsx
089b003 
Co-authored-by: Eric Han <117511920+eh2077@users.noreply.github.com>
@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor Author

mountiny commented Feb 9, 2026

@MariaHCD @marcochavezf Ready for you

MariaHCD
MariaHCD previously approved these changes Feb 9, 2026
View reviewed changes
marcochavezf
marcochavezf previously approved these changes Feb 9, 2026
View reviewed changes
mountiny and others added 2 commits February 9, 2026 22:06
@mountiny
Merge branch 'vit-refactor-confirmReadyToOpenApp' of github.com:Expen…
c457dad 
…sify/App into vit-refactor-confirmReadyToOpenApp
@mountiny @cursoragent
Fix test calls to match updated addComment and subscribeToUserEvents …
d63a51e 
…signatures

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@mountiny mountiny dismissed stale reviews from MariaHCD and marcochavezf via d63a51e February 9, 2026 21:26
@MariaHCD
Copy link
Contributor

MariaHCD commented Feb 10, 2026

Oops, there are new merge conflicts

@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 10, 2026
Closed
@mountiny @cursoragent
Fix accidental Mobile-Expensify submodule pointer change
9492545 
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@MariaHCD MariaHCD merged commit 7f586f1 into main Feb 10, 2026
31 checks passed
@MariaHCD MariaHCD deleted the vit-refactor-confirmReadyToOpenApp branch February 10, 2026 14:14
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 10, 2026

🚧 @MariaHCD has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 10, 2026

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #81618.

Android 🤖 iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-7f586f1-27c4bed4e1bad1547533f64eeead688916046d3b/index.html https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-7f586f1-d61873b20eca4b461028c5927fe580bab8fc178b/index.html
Android iOS
Web 🕸️
https://81618.pr-testing.expensify.com
Web

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Feb 10, 2026

✋ 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 OSBotify mentioned this pull request Feb 11, 2026
Closed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Feb 11, 2026

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/MariaHCD in version: 9.3.17-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Feb 12, 2026

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/lakchote in version: 9.3.17-9 🚀

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

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Feb 12, 2026
Closed
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@MariaHCD MariaHCD MariaHCD approved these changes

@marcochavezf marcochavezf marcochavezf left review comments

+1 more reviewer

@eh2077 eh2077 eh2077 approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@mountiny mountiny

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@mountiny @eh2077 @joekaufmanexpensify @MariaHCD @OSBotify @marcochavezf