Skip to content

Remove unsafe type assertions from navigation, duplicates, and bank connections - #102986

Draft
KJ21-ENG wants to merge 3 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
KJ21-ENG:seatbelt-v2/2f101b35-a968-40b8-9601-b263fb872904
Draft

KJ21-ENG wants to merge 3 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
KJ21-ENG:seatbelt-v2/2f101b35-a968-40b8-9601-b263fb872904

Conversation

@KJ21-ENG

@KJ21-ENG KJ21-ENG commented Oct 5, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

Replace unsafe assertions in navigation history, duplicate filtering and preview accessors, and bank callback lookups with truthful input types and local checks. Malformed scalar/null history params intentionally fall through to the router; history-preserving operations retain opaque entries, while route rehydration rebuilds route history.

Changed files:

  • src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/routerExtensions/addPushParamsRouterExtension.ts
  • src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/routerExtensions/addRootHistoryRouterExtension.ts
  • src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/routerExtensions/addRootHistoryRouterExtensionUtils.ts
  • src/libs/TransactionUtils/duplicates.ts
  • src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts
  • src/libs/actions/getCompanyCardBankConnection/index.tsx
  • tests/unit/GetCompanyCardBankConnectionTest.ts
  • tests/unit/Navigation/routerExtensions/addPushParamsRouterExtension.test.ts
  • tests/unit/Navigation/routerExtensions/addRootHistoryRouterExtension.test.ts
  • tests/unit/TransactionUtilsTest.ts

Fixed Issues

$ #94739
PROPOSAL: #94739 (comment)

Tests

Focused router-history, transaction/IOU, bank-connection, and add-existing-expense search Jest suites passed.

QA Steps

  • 1. History across tabs and layouts.

    • In narrow Spend > Expenses, switch Reports > Expenses > Reports.
    • Use browser Back twice, then Forward twice.
    • Expect matching selected tabs and contents with no extra history step.
    • Go Back, choose a different tab, and confirm the old forward branch is replaced.
    • Resize narrow > wide > narrow and confirm Back still follows the same history.
  • 2. Expense panel return.

    • Create a manual expense from a non-workspace Inbox chat.
    • Open and close the merchant editor, then open the expense row/details and close it.
    • Expect the entered values to remain correct and the underlying chat/panel context to be retained on return.
    • Check the corresponding close/Back flow in a narrow layout.
  • 3. Desktop menu and resize.

    • Open the expense's More menu and press Escape.
    • Expect the menu to close and focus to return to its trigger.
    • Open Help, resize the window, and confirm the relevant panel/control remains usable without losing the current context.

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.
  • 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

Recordings (6)
01-history-desktop.mp4
02-history-narrow.mp4
03-expense-panel-controls-desktop.mp4
04-expense-row-return-desktop.mp4
05-expense-panel-controls-narrow.mp4
06-expense-row-return-narrow.mp4

…n types

Seatbelt-Operation: session4-sign-28673b16-6202-4c89-baec-1773e1dedf28
Seatbelt-Operation: session4-corrected-sign-b69973f5-49aa-4f55-b41a-dfcdc1d1c3a7
Seatbelt-Operation: remaining-102986-sign-35ae4f8f-bb11-4640-a2dc-ce2aed4c9faa
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Oct 17, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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
...r/routerExtensions/addPushParamsRouterExtension.ts 99.33% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
.../routerExtensions/addRootHistoryRouterExtension.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...erExtensions/addRootHistoryRouterExtensionUtils.ts 89.04% <100.00%> (-0.44%) ⬇️
src/libs/TransactionUtils/amountUtils.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/TransactionUtils/duplicates.ts 90.10% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts 95.55% <100.00%> (+0.03%) ⬆️
...ibs/actions/getCompanyCardBankConnection/index.tsx 100.00% <100.00%> (+7.40%) ⬆️
...nts/SidePanel/useSyncSidePanelWithHistory/index.ts 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 27 files with indirect coverage changes

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
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.

1 participant