Add getCardAssignmentDateOption util method

[carlosmiceli]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$
PROPOSAL:

Tests

• 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]."

Navigate to Workspace → Company Cards → Assign Card
Select an employee as cardholder
Select a card to assign
Set transaction start date and complete assignment
Verify card assigned successfully with correct date

• 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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...workspace/companyCards/assignCard/AssigneeStep.tsx	56.52% <ø> (+4.52%)	⬆️
...ce/companyCards/assignCard/InviteNewMemberStep.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/libs/CardUtils.ts	78.19% <0.00%> (-0.94%)	⬇️
... and 17 files with indirect coverage changes

[carlosmiceli]

@MelvinBot fix the TS issues

[MelvinBot]

Fixed the typecheck failure. The issue was that getCardAssignmentDateOption had its existingDateOption parameter typed as ValueOf<typeof CONST.COMPANY_CARD.TRANSACTION_START_DATE_OPTIONS>, but it receives assignCard?.cardToAssign?.dateOption which is typed as string (from AssignCardData).

Fix: Changed the parameter type to string and used explicit equality checks against the const values to return the properly typed result, instead of relying on the input being pre-narrowed.

[melvin-bot]

@nkuoch 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]

[github-actions]

Code Review

src/libs/CardUtils.ts — Incomplete refactoring

Line 863 (getCardAssignmentDateOption): The startDate assignment in AssigneeStep.tsx follows the exact same !isEditing ? defaultValue : (existingValue ?? defaultValue) pattern as dateOption did, yet it was not extracted into a util. This leaves the refactoring half-done — the duplicated startDate ternary still appears twice in AssigneeStep.tsx (lines 95-97 and 132-134). Consider also extracting a getCardAssignmentStartDate util (or a combined helper that returns both dateOption and startDate) so the refactoring is complete.

src/libs/CardUtils.ts — Verbose JSDoc

Lines 844-854: The JSDoc is overly verbose for a small utility function. The function name and parameter names already communicate the intent clearly. Consider trimming to just the summary line, or removing the JSDoc entirely — the code is self-explanatory.

[carlosmiceli]

@MelvinBot can you implement the improvements here: #82707 (comment)

[MelvinBot]

Implemented both improvements from the review:

1. Extracted getCardAssignmentStartDate util — eliminates the duplicated !isEditing ? format(new Date(), ...) : (existingStartDate ?? format(new Date(), ...)) ternary that appeared twice in AssigneeStep.tsx. Also removed the now-unused date-fns format import from that file.

2. Trimmed JSDoc — replaced the verbose multi-line JSDoc on getCardAssignmentDateOption with a single summary line. Applied the same concise style to the new getCardAssignmentStartDate function.

[nkuoch]

PR #82707 Review – Expensify/App

Summary

The PR moves card-assignment date logic into shared helpers in CardUtils and uses them in AssigneeStep and InviteNewMemberStep. The refactor is clear and reduces duplication; one consistency fix is recommended.

---

What’s good

• Shared helpers
  getCardAssignmentDateOption and getCardAssignmentStartDate in CardUtils give a single place for “not editing vs editing” behavior and are documented with JSDoc.

• AssigneeStep
  Both helpers are used correctly with isEditing and existing draft data, and the duplicate blocks are removed. Dropping the format import from date-fns here is correct.

• Types
  ValueOf<typeof CONST.COMPANY_CARD.TRANSACTION_START_DATE_OPTIONS> is an appropriate return type for the date option helper.

---

Suggestions

1. Use getCardAssignmentStartDate in InviteNewMemberStep (consistency + format)

InviteNewMemberStep now uses getCardAssignmentDateOption but still sets startDate manually:

cardToAssign.startDate = assignCard?.cardToAssign?.startDate ?? new Date().toISOString().split('T').at(0);

Elsewhere the app uses format(new Date(), CONST.DATE.FNS_FORMAT_STRING) (via getCardAssignmentStartDate). toISOString() is UTC, so the string can differ from the local-date format used in the rest of the flow (and can be “wrong” day near midnight UTC).

Recommendation: use the same helper and format as in AssigneeStep:

• Import and use getCardAssignmentStartDate in InviteNewMemberStep.
• Set:
  • cardToAssign.startDate = getCardAssignmentStartDate(true, assignCard?.cardToAssign?.startDate);
    in both places where you currently set startDate and dateOption (so date and option stay in sync and use the same “today” format).

That keeps behavior the same (existing start date or “today”) while aligning date formatting and logic with the rest of the assign-card flow.

2. Optional: narrow type for existingDateOption

In getCardAssignmentDateOption, existingDateOption is string | undefined. If you want stricter typing and the constant set is known, you could type it as ValueOf<typeof CONST.COMPANY_CARD.TRANSACTION_START_DATE_OPTIONS> | undefined so invalid values are caught at compile time. Not required for this PR.

---

Summary

• CardUtils.ts – New helpers and exports look good.
• AssigneeStep.tsx – Refactor and use of helpers look correct.
• InviteNewMemberStep.tsx – Using getCardAssignmentStartDate(true, assignCard?.cardToAssign?.startDate) for both confirmation paths would improve consistency and avoid potential timezone/format differences.

No other issues spotted; the main follow-up is aligning startDate in InviteNewMemberStep with the new helpers and shared date format.

[joekaufmanexpensify]

No product review needed

[nkuoch]

@carlosmiceli conflict and if you want to do te suggestion from #82707 (comment)

[carlosmiceli]

@MelvinBot can you merge main and fix conflicts please?

[MelvinBot]

Merged main and resolved conflicts in 3 files:

• src/libs/CardUtils.ts — Kept both getCardAssignmentDateOption (this PR) and main's version of getCardAssignmentStartDate. Removed the unused FeedKeysWithAssignedCards import that was only on this branch.
• src/pages/workspace/companyCards/assignCard/AssigneeStep.tsx — Import now includes both getCardAssignmentDateOption and getCardAssignmentStartDate. Both util functions used at call sites.
• src/pages/workspace/companyCards/assignCard/InviteNewMemberStep.tsx — Same as above: import includes both utils, startDate uses getCardAssignmentStartDate (from main), dateOption uses getCardAssignmentDateOption (from this PR).

[carlosmiceli]

@nkuoch ok, I think this is ready for another review :)

[nkuoch]

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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[github-actions]

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

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #82707.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-81afbbc-0dbc7e1-1690238b20079cb211921671545d22567133c45b/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-81afbbc-0dbc7e1-c77be0bc737509569f94fa87bfd368e359349dff/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://82707.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/nkuoch in version: 9.3.26-0 🚀

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

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.3.26-8 🚀

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