Skip to content

[Payment due @DylanDylann] [NO QA] [Phase 2 of #66427, Sub-PR 1/5] Mark current getReportName to be deprecated method#96155

Open
hoangzinh wants to merge 5 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
hoangzinh:refactor/66427-phase2-sub1-getreportname-quarantine
Open

[Payment due @DylanDylann] [NO QA] [Phase 2 of #66427, Sub-PR 1/5] Mark current getReportName to be deprecated method#96155
hoangzinh wants to merge 5 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
hoangzinh:refactor/66427-phase2-sub1-getreportname-quarantine

Conversation

@hoangzinh

@hoangzinh hoangzinh commented Jul 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

Part of #66427. Phase 2, Sub-PR 1 of 5 — the quarantine step. No behavior change:

  1. getReportName is now string-only: (report?, derivedReportName?: string). Passing a Record is a compile error (TS2345).
  2. Adds deprecatedGetReportName(report?, reportAttributes?), tagged @deprecated, which resolves reportAttributes?.[reportID]?.reportName and delegates. Behavior is identical, including the !report?.reportID → '' guard.
  3. Renames all 44 remaining Record-form call sites to the wrapper. Purely mechanical — the Record is already in scope, no new hooks or threading.
  4. Baselines the resulting deprecation errors in config/eslint/eslint.seatbelt.tsv (+33 rows / 50 occurrences), so new wrapper usage exceeds the count and fails CI.

Next steps

  • Sub-PR 2 — migrate deprecatedGetReportNamegetReportName per directory src/components/**
  • Sub-PR 3 — migrate deprecatedGetReportNamegetReportName per directory src/libs/**
  • Sub-PR 4 — migrate deprecatedGetReportNamegetReportName per directory src/pages/** + tests.
  • Final Sub-PR 5 — delete deprecatedGetReportName; the compiler proves zero callers remain and its baseline rows go to zero.

Fixed Issues

$ #66427
PROPOSAL: #66427 (comment)

Tests

  1. Sign in to any account
  2. Verify if user can use app normally
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

// 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 followed proper code patterns (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 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)
  • 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.
  • 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

Screen.Recording.2026-07-15.at.16.15.53.mov

…apper

getReportName only ever read one field from the whole ReportAttributes Record
it accepted, forcing callers to subscribe to every report's attributes and
re-render when any of them changed. Narrowing it to take just the name string
is an atomic signature change: the moment the 2nd param becomes `string`, ~40
callers break at once, which is too large to migrate in one reviewable PR.

Split the mechanical part ("make getReportName misuse-proof") from the real
per-site work ("migrate each caller"), and enforce at both levels:

- getReportName is now string-only, `(report?, derivedReportName?: string)`,
  so passing a Record is rejected at compile time (TS2345).
- deprecatedGetReportName wraps it for the un-migrated call sites, resolving
  `reportAttributes?.[reportID]?.reportName` and delegating. Behavior is
  identical, including the `!report?.reportID -> ''` guard.
- All 44 remaining Record-form references (42 calls + 2 callback passes) now
  go through the wrapper and are pinned in the seatbelt baseline, so a new
  usage exceeds the recorded count and fails CI.

The @deprecated tag ratchets independently of the 112 other baselined
deprecations: the stratify processor rewrites it to a per-API rule ID,
@typescript-eslint/no-deprecated/deprecatedGetReportName. ReportActionsUtils
threads the function as a callback to break a dependency cycle, so its
parameter type propagates the deprecation under its own getReportNameCallback
rule ID, baselined separately.

Counts only ratchet down from here. Subsequent sub-PRs migrate callers to
getReportName with an O(1) name selector -- where the re-render win actually
lands -- and the final one deletes the wrapper.

Part of Expensify#66427.
…-sub1-getreportname-quarantine

# Conflicts:
#	config/eslint/eslint.seatbelt.tsv
@hoangzinh
hoangzinh marked this pull request as ready for review July 15, 2026 09:19
@hoangzinh
hoangzinh requested review from a team as code owners July 15, 2026 09:19
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@DylanDylann 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
melvin-bot Bot removed request for a team July 15, 2026 09:19
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jul 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/components/AvatarWithDisplayName.tsx 80.61% <100.00%> (ø)
...eyRequestConfirmationList/sections/ReportField.tsx 85.10% <100.00%> (ø)
src/components/ReportWelcomeText.tsx 96.72% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/ModifiedExpenseMessage.ts 90.59% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/OptionsListUtils/index.ts 86.89% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/ReportNameUtils.ts 82.05% <100.00%> (+0.08%) ⬆️
src/libs/SearchQueryUtils.ts 87.09% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts 63.10% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/SidebarUtils.ts 80.38% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/actions/Task.ts 64.22% <ø> (ø)
... and 20 more
... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

"../../src/components/AvatarCropModal/ImageCropView.tsx" "@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-type-assertion" 1
"../../src/components/AvatarCropModal/Slider.tsx" "@typescript-eslint/no-unsafe-type-assertion" 1
"../../src/components/AvatarSelector.tsx" "no-restricted-syntax" 2
"../../src/components/AvatarWithDisplayName.tsx" "@typescript-eslint/no-deprecated/deprecatedGetReportName" 1

@DylanDylann DylanDylann Jul 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@hoangzinh Could you revert this change? This file is updated automatically, so we don't need to modify it manually.

@DylanDylann

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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 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 using Avatar have 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 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.
  • 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

Screen.Recording.2026-07-15.at.16.31.52.mov

@DylanDylann

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The code change looks good to me

@JmillsExpensify
JmillsExpensify removed their request for review July 15, 2026 16:04

@JmillsExpensify JmillsExpensify left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No product review required.

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot changed the title [NO QA] [Phase 2 of #66427, Sub-PR 1/5] Mark current getReportName to be deprecated method [Payment due @DylanDylann] [NO QA] [Phase 2 of #66427, Sub-PR 1/5] Mark current getReportName to be deprecated method Jul 15, 2026
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🎯 @DylanDylann, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

A payment issue will be created for your review once this PR is deployed to production.
E/E issue linked to the PR - no internal issue.

If payment is not needed (e.g., regression PR review fix etc), react with 👎 to this comment to prevent the payment issue from being created.

@hoangzinh

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Melvin didn't work. cc @marcochavezf your turn

@marcochavezf

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Conflicts and eslint failing

Rename the two remaining Record-form callers the mechanical quarantine
rename missed, which were failing to compile against the now string-only
getReportName signature:
- ReportUtils.getReportPreviewMessageForCopy
- BaseReportActionContextMenu (memberChangeLogRoomReportName)
Both now call deprecatedGetReportName.

Also drop the now-unused deprecatedGetReportName import from
ContextMenuActions (fully migrated to the string-form getReportName), and
reconcile the eslint-seatbelt baseline: +1 SplitExpenseEditPage (a caller
that was never baselined), -1 ContextMenuActions (auto-tightened).

Refs: Expensify#66427
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.

4 participants