Skip to content

Conversation

@samranahm
Copy link
Contributor

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #79830
$ #79831
$ #78464
PROPOSAL: #78464 (comment)

Tests

Precondition:

  • Admin invited two members on workspace
  • One member is set as approver in workflow

[Member]

  1. Create an expense with "Rayanair" as merchant and without category.
  2. Open the expense report and wait for Concierge message "Set the category based on past activity..." to appear.
  3. Press "Explain" url and verify a thread is created and a comment is send in thread "Please explain this to me"

[Approver]

  1. Open the expense report submitted by member
  2. Click thead on the "Set the category based on past activity..." message
  3. Verify you can access the thead without any error
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

  1. Create an expense with "Rayanair" as merchant and without category.
  2. Open the expense report and wait for Concierge message "Set the category based on past activity..." to appear.
  3. Turn off internet
  4. Press "Explain" url and verify a thread is created and a comment is send in thread "Please explain this to me"
  5. Navigate back to expense report and double click on Concierge message "Set the category based on past activity..."
  6. Click reply in thead and verify the already created thread open with no error and there is no infinite loading

QA Steps

Same as test
// 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

  • 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
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
macOS.Chrome.one.mp4
macOS.Chrome.two.mp4

@samranahm samranahm requested a review from a team as a code owner January 18, 2026 21:17
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings January 18, 2026 21:17
@samranahm samranahm requested a review from a team as a code owner January 18, 2026 21:17
@samranahm samranahm changed the title refactor: buildOptimisticChildReport to handle optimistic report crea… refactor: buildOptimisticChildReport to handle optimistic report creation correctly Jan 18, 2026
});

Onyx.merge(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${childReportID ?? newChat.reportID}`, newChat);
if (!childReportID) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

❌ CONSISTENCY-5 (docs) The condition \!childReportID does not properly handle the scenario where childReportID is provided but the report does not exist in Onyx yet. Before: Callers checked \!existingChildReport to determine if openReport() was needed After: Checks \!childReportID which is a different condition Breaking scenario: When childReportID is provided but report is not in Onyx, the code will call Onyx.merge() instead of openReport(), leading to missing data and potential failures. Fix: Pass existingChildReport parameter or check report existence inside the function: typescript const existingReport = allReports?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${childReportID ?? newChat.reportID}`]; if (\!existingReport) { const participantLogins = PersonalDetailsUtils.getLoginsByAccountIDs(Object.keys(newChat.participants ?? {}).map(Number)); openReport(newChat.reportID, "", participantLogins, newChat, parentReportAction.reportActionID, undefined, undefined, undefined, true); } else { Onyx.merge(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${childReportID}`, newChat); }

Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR refactors the buildOptimisticChildReport function to consolidate duplicate code by moving the openReport call logic from navigateToAndOpenChildReport and explain functions into buildOptimisticChildReport itself.

Changes:

  • Modified buildOptimisticChildReport to conditionally call openReport or Onyx.merge based on whether childReportID is provided
  • Removed duplicate openReport logic from navigateToAndOpenChildReport function
  • Removed duplicate openReport logic from explain function

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Comment on lines +1509 to +1514
if (!childReportID) {
const participantLogins = PersonalDetailsUtils.getLoginsByAccountIDs(Object.keys(newChat.participants ?? {}).map(Number));
openReport(newChat.reportID, '', participantLogins, newChat, parentReportAction.reportActionID, undefined, undefined, undefined, true);
} else {
Onyx.merge(`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.REPORT}${childReportID}`, newChat);
}
Copy link

Copilot AI Jan 18, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This conditional logic introduces a behavioral regression. When a childReportID exists but the child report hasn't been loaded into Onyx yet (e.g., when clicking on a thread that was created previously but not yet opened), the original code would call openReport to fetch the thread from the server. The new code only calls Onyx.merge, which creates an optimistic report locally without fetching the actual thread data from the server. This means existing threads won't load their messages properly. The condition should check whether existingChildReport is falsy (not whether childReportID is falsy) to match the original behavior and ensure threads are fetched from the server when they already exist.

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 18, 2026

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/libs/actions/Report.ts 53.65% <0.00%> (+0.84%) ⬆️
... and 251 files with indirect coverage changes

@samranahm
Copy link
Contributor Author

@marcaaron You left a couple of comments on the previous PR, please let me know if we can address them in this one.

@trjExpensify
Copy link
Contributor

PR doesn’t need product input as a refactor PR. Unassigning and unsubscribing myself.

@trjExpensify trjExpensify removed request for a team and trjExpensify January 19, 2026 13:58
@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor

eh2077 commented Jan 19, 2026

@samranahm Thanks for preparing this PR but I think this can be closed as the original PR has been closed.

@samranahm
Copy link
Contributor Author

Agree, we can close this one. I will add both these tests in follow-up PR.

@samranahm samranahm closed this Jan 19, 2026
@samranahm samranahm deleted the 79831/thread-loads-infinitely branch January 19, 2026 14:28
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.

3 participants