[No QA] Fix ESLint errors in popover save callbacks

[francoisl]

Explanation of Change

Use the shared InlineEditSaveResult type for onSave in both signatures of usePopoverEditState.

PR 103166 changed EditableProps.onSave to return void | boolean | Promise<boolean>, while the popover hook still declared a void return. Passing those callbacks into the hook causes @typescript-eslint/no-misused-promises errors in DateCell, CategoryCell, and TagCell.

This change aligns the callback types without changing runtime behavior.

Failing job: https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/runs/37845005311/job/113543571292

Fixed Issues

N/A — follow-up for a CI failure; no separate tracking issue.

For #103166

PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

1. Run npm run lint -- --no-cache src/components/EditableCell/usePopoverEditState.ts src/components/Search/SearchList/ListItem/DateCell.tsx src/components/TransactionItemRow/DataCells/CategoryCell.tsx src/components/TransactionItemRow/DataCells/TagCell.tsx.
2. Verify that all three reported no-misused-promises errors are gone and the lint command exits successfully.
3. Run npm test -- --silent --runInBand tests/unit/inlineEditing/editableCellHooks.test.ts tests/ui/DateCellTest.tsx.
4. Verify that both suites pass, with 25 passing tests.
5. Run npm run react-compiler-compliance-check check-changed.
6. Verify that the changed hook passes both the Babel and OXC compiler checks.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console — N/A for this type-only change.

AI Tests

Checks completed before committing:

• Passed: focused lint command above, with caching disabled.
• Passed: npm run lint-changed -- --no-cache.
• Passed: focused Jest command above — 2 suites, 25 tests.
• Passed: npm run react-compiler-compliance-check check-changed.
• Passed: npm run spell-changed.
• Passed: npx --no-install oxfmt --check src/components/EditableCell/usePopoverEditState.ts.
• Passed: git diff --check.
• npm run typecheck: app, Bun, Node, and chart-renderer projects passed. The Jest project failed with an unrelated TS2322 mock-type error in tests/unit/MarkdownTextInputParserRegistrationTest.tsx:37: jsi_registerMarkdownWorklet expects a serializable worklet and a numeric return, while the mock takes a numeric parser ID and returns a Set<number>.
• Full-repository lint was interrupted. The full Jest suite and Storybook smoke test were not run. The user requested no further full-suite reruns for now.

Offline tests

N/A — only TypeScript callback return annotations change; no runtime or network behavior changes.

QA Steps

N/A — type-only ESLint fix. The PR title includes [No QA].

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console — N/A for this type-only change.

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 any copy / text that was added to the app 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 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)
• 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 the PR adds or modifies the UI:
  • I asked an AI agent to review the changes for accessibility issues and addressed its findings.
  • I tested with a screen reader (VoiceOver on macOS) and verified all new/changed elements are reachable with a logical focus order.
  • I verified all new/changed elements have meaningful accessible names and roles.
  • I verified state changes are announced (e.g. checked/unchecked, expanded/collapsed, selected).
• 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 — type-only change.

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A — type-only change.

iOS: Native

N/A — type-only change.

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A — type-only change.

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A — type-only change.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-08T22:54:18.893409Z	69e75e1	PR opened

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[melvin-bot]

@grgia 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]

[francoisl]

Going to use Chuck's PR https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/103539instead