[NoQA] Fix typecheck: pass movedFromReportName in ModifiedExpenseMessageTest - #101467
Merged
Merged
Conversation
mountiny
changed the title
Merged
52 tasks
mountiny
marked this pull request as ready for review
September 17, 2026 20:28
melvin-bot
Bot
requested review from
mkhutornyi
and removed request for
a team
September 17, 2026 20:28
|
@mkhutornyi 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] |
robertjchen
previously approved these changes
Sep 17, 2026
robertjchen
left a comment
robertjchen
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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 Issuessection 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
Testssection - I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the
QA stepssection - 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 verified the steps for local testing are in the
- 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 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 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)
- 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 usingAvatarhave been tested & I retested again) - If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately
- 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
- 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 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
Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris 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
Designlabel and/or tagged@Expensify/designso the design team can review the changes.
- 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
mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps. - 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
iOS: HybridApp
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
luacmartins
previously approved these changes
Sep 17, 2026
Two test call sites to getForReportAction were missing the required movedFromReportName property, breaking typecheck on main.
marcochavezf
previously approved these changes
Sep 17, 2026
mountiny
force-pushed
the
vit-fix-modifiedexpensemessage-typecheck
branch
from
September 17, 2026 20:52
5af1035 to
e86b963
Compare
…ageTest mockedUsePermissions.mockReturnValue() only provided isBetaEnabled and cast the object to the full UsePermissions type, which also requires isBetaEnabledOrUnknown. Adding the missing property removes the need for the unsafe type assertion.
mountiny
dismissed stale reviews from marcochavezf, luacmartins, and robertjchen
via
September 17, 2026 21:06
1e5b5f2
luacmartins
approved these changes
Sep 17, 2026
82 tasks
Contributor
|
🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.4.82-0 🚀
|
Contributor
|
🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.4.86-0 🚀
|
Contributor
|
🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.4.89-0 🚀
|
Contributor
|
🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.4.89-0 🚀
Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry): |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Explanation of Change
The
typecheckCI job is failing onmain(https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/runs/35267618569/job/105358617556). Two calls togetForReportActionintests/unit/ModifiedExpenseMessageTest.tswere missing the requiredmovedFromReportNameproperty, which was added to the function's parameter type but not backfilled into every test call site. This PR addsmovedFromReportName: undefinedto the two call sites at lines 460 and 491 so they match the type, matching the pattern already used at the other 83 call sites in the same file.Fixed Issues
$ #101463
$ #101468
PROPOSAL:
Tests
npm run typecheckon this branch.npx jest tests/unit/ModifiedExpenseMessageTest.ts.Offline tests
N/A — this is a test-only typecheck fix with no runtime behavior change.
QA Steps
Same as tests. This is a type-only test fix; there is no user-facing behavior change to QA on staging.
PR Author Checklist
### Fixed Issuessection aboveTestssectionOffline stepssectionQA stepssectiontoggleReportand notonIconClick)Avatar, I verified the components usingAvatarare working as expected)StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))npm run compress-svg)Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris working as expected in all cases)Designlabel and/or tagged@Expensify/designso the design team can review the changes.mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps.Screenshots/Videos
Android: Native
N/A — test-only change
Android: mWeb Chrome
N/A — test-only change
iOS: Native
N/A — test-only change
iOS: mWeb Safari
N/A — test-only change
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
N/A — test-only change