Skip to content

[NoQA] Fix typecheck failure in SearchUIUtilsTest from PR #95758 - #95985

Merged
mountiny merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
fix/search-ui-utils-test-typecheck
Jul 13, 2026
Merged

[NoQA] Fix typecheck failure in SearchUIUtilsTest from PR #95758#95985
mountiny merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
fix/search-ui-utils-test-typecheck

Conversation

@mountiny

@mountiny mountiny commented Jul 13, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

Fixes the typecheck failure on main introduced by PR #95758. The new test in SearchUIUtilsTest.ts passed an extra empty-string argument to getSortedSections, shifting all subsequent parameters and causing a TypeScript error.

Fixed Issues

$ #95982
$ #95981

Tests

  1. Confirm npm run typecheck passes locally or in CI.
  2. Confirm the sorts transactions by the policy name resolved through the provided translate function test in SearchUIUtilsTest passes.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A — test-only change.

QA Steps

N/A — test-only change; no user-facing behavior changes.

  • 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 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

@mountiny @cursoragent
Fix typecheck failure in SearchUIUtilsTest from PR #95758
f13cae9 
Remove an erroneous empty-string argument that shifted getSortedSections
parameters and broke the typecheck on main.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@mountiny
mountiny requested a review from a team as a code owner July 13, 2026 17:43
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from lakchote and removed request for a team July 13, 2026 17:43
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@lakchote 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]

@MelvinBot MelvinBot mentioned this pull request Jul 13, 2026
Merged
53 tasks
@mountiny @cursoragent
Fix useProfileAvatarFormTest mock for useDiscardChangesConfirmation
13a3c27 
Return suppressDiscardPrompt from the mock so destructuring in the hook
does not throw when the test suite runs.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
@mountiny mountiny changed the title Fix typecheck failure in SearchUIUtilsTest from PR #95758 [NoQA] Fix typecheck failure in SearchUIUtilsTest from PR #95758 Jul 13, 2026
robertjchen
robertjchen approved these changes Jul 13, 2026
View reviewed changes

@robertjchen robertjchen 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.

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 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
    • 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 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

Android: HybridApp
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: HybridApp
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

@mountiny
mountiny merged commit 36a6c79 into main Jul 13, 2026
30 of 32 checks passed
@mountiny
mountiny deleted the fix/search-ui-utils-test-typecheck branch July 13, 2026 19:16
@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot added the Emergency label Jul 13, 2026
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@mountiny looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

@mountiny

mountiny commented Jul 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Not emergency the ui was showing green button for me that nothing is blocking

@mollfpr mollfpr mentioned this pull request Jul 14, 2026
Closed
@OSBotify OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jul 14, 2026
Closed
@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Jul 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.4.34-0 🚀

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

This was referenced Jul 16, 2026
Closed
Closed
@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Jul 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.4.34-14 🚀

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

@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Jul 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.4.34-14 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@robertjchen robertjchen robertjchen approved these changes
@Beamanator Beamanator Beamanator approved these changes
@blimpich blimpich blimpich approved these changes
@lakchote lakchote lakchote approved these changes

Assignees

@mountiny mountiny

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@mountiny @OSBotify @robertjchen @Beamanator @blimpich @lakchote