Skip HTML parsing for task report names when content is plain text by TMisiukiewicz · Pull Request #83439 · Expensify/App

TMisiukiewicz · 2026-02-25T11:24:25Z

Explanation of Change

Added a Parser.isHTML() utility method that checks whether a string contains HTML tags before attempting to parse it. Applied this check in both ReportNameUtils.ts and ReportUtils.ts when resolving task report names — if the name is plain text, we skip the htmlToText call entirely. This avoids unnecessary regex/DOM parsing overhead on every render of a task report name, which is a hot path in the LHN and report header.

On Ryan's account with a lot of tasks (all their names masked so it's not HTML) it reduced the time of parsing from 1.4s to ~20ms (time spent on isHTML checks).

Fixed Issues

$ #83505
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Open any chat
Create task, name it "Visit https://google.com"
Once created, open it
Verify the name in the LHN displays "Visit https://google.com" without HTML

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

android.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

ios.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios-web.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

melvin-bot · 2026-02-26T07:57:56Z

@hoangzinh 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]

melvin-bot · 2026-02-26T07:58:01Z

@mountiny 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]

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 28bad5f554

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".

src/libs/ReportNameUtils.ts

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

hoangzinh · 2026-02-26T11:23:37Z

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 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.2026-02-26.at.18.44.57.a.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-02-26.at.18.46.26.ac.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-02-26.at.18.50.13.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-02-26.at.18.48.43.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-02-26.at.18.42.54.web.mov

hoangzinh · 2026-02-26T11:29:29Z

src/libs/ReportNameUtils.ts

-        return Parser.htmlToText(report?.reportName ?? '').trim();
+        const taskName = report?.reportName ?? '';
+
+        return Parser.isHTML(taskName) ? Parser.htmlToText(taskName).trim() : taskName.trim();


Is it worth moving the Parser.isHTML check into the Parser.htmlToText method? Or should we maintain the separation of concerns between those methods?

I think we should always target to maintain the separation of concerns

Make senses 👍

hoangzinh

LGTM

github-actions · 2026-02-26T21:03:15Z

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

github-actions · 2026-02-26T21:07:58Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #83439.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-75e8fbe-fdd2355-d3efa7eeb6c72b25d0fafe531784462ead9b023b/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-75e8fbe-fdd2355-2841ce9ef665e5df2762087ce8dba26b336deb4c/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://83439.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

PR #83439 removed areAllConnectionsSet from DerivedValueContext type, while PR #83456 added this test using that property. Remove the stale property from the test mock to fix the typecheck. Made-with: Cursor

OSBotify · 2026-02-27T15:27:47Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.3.27-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-03-02T22:19:07Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.3.27-8 🚀

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

TMisiukiewicz added 3 commits February 25, 2026 12:10

check if HTML before parsing for task report names

af6eb57

add tests for Parser.isHTML and task report name handling

7ff67f2

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into perf/reduce-html-parsing

9f07bcf

melvin-bot bot assigned TMisiukiewicz Feb 25, 2026

TMisiukiewicz changed the title ~~[No QA] Skip HTML parsing for task report names when content is plain text~~ Skip HTML parsing for task report names when content is plain text Feb 25, 2026

TMisiukiewicz added 2 commits February 25, 2026 12:46

prettier fix

06d29e6

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into perf/reduce-html-parsing

28bad5f

TMisiukiewicz marked this pull request as ready for review February 26, 2026 07:57

TMisiukiewicz requested review from a team as code owners February 26, 2026 07:57

melvin-bot bot requested a review from hoangzinh February 26, 2026 07:57

melvin-bot bot requested review from a team, heyjennahay and mountiny and removed request for a team February 26, 2026 07:57

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Feb 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

src/libs/ReportNameUtils.ts Show resolved Hide resolved

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

PR comments

9e6da24

hoangzinh reviewed Feb 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

hoangzinh approved these changes Feb 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

mountiny approved these changes Feb 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit 75e8fbe into Expensify:main Feb 26, 2026
30 of 33 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Feb 26, 2026

Investigate workflow job failing on main: typecheck / typecheck #83627

Closed

mountiny mentioned this pull request Feb 26, 2026

[No QA] Fix TypeScript error in CompanyCardsRBRTest #83628

Merged

52 tasks

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Feb 27, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-02-27 #83700

Closed

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Mar 2, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-03-09] Investigating performance of Ryan's account #83505

Closed

Conversation

TMisiukiewicz commented Feb 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

hoangzinh commented Feb 26, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

hoangzinh Feb 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

TMisiukiewicz Feb 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

hoangzinh Feb 26, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

hoangzinh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Feb 27, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Mar 2, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

TMisiukiewicz commented Feb 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading

hoangzinh commented Feb 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading