fix: hide To recipient when From and To recipient are the same by linhvovan29546 · Pull Request #62288 · Expensify/App

linhvovan29546 · 2025-05-19T13:29:35Z

Explanation of Change

This PR handles the condition to only show the "To" recipient for the expense type, and only when the "From" and "To" recipients are different. It also updates the UI accordingly.

Fixed Issues

$ #62109
PROPOSAL: #62109 (comment)

Tests

Pre-requisite: Use a mobile device, or make your screen narrow, or screen width less than 1024.

Create a workspace
Create a couple of expenses
Submit the report.
Go to Reports > Expense Reports
Verify that the Submitter avatar and name are displayed correctly.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as test above

QA Steps

Same as test above

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2025-05-19.at.19.49.34.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2025-05-19.at.19.52.16.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2025-05-19.at.19.47.46.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-05-19.at.19.46.46.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-05-19.at.19.55.14.mov

Screen.Recording.2025-05-19.at.19.39.01.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2025-05-19.at.19.43.50.mov

linhvovan29546 · 2025-05-19T13:36:20Z

+                        participantFromDisplayName={participantFromDisplayName}
+                        participantTo={participantTo}
+                        participantToDisplayName={participantToDisplayName}
+                        fromRecipientStyle={!shouldDisplayArrowIcon ? styles.mw100 : {}}


The original style uses mw50, so when we show only participantFrom, the width is too small. I’ve updated it to mw100. Please let me know if we should stick with mw50

Before After

linhvovan29546 · 2025-05-19T13:43:54Z

Since this PR modifies the UI of ReportListItemHeader, and the ExpenseItemHeaderNarrow has the same UI, so I’ve updated that component as well for consistency.

linhvovan29546 · 2025-05-19T13:49:43Z

-                    participantToDisplayName={participantToDisplayName}
-                />
-            </View>
-            <View style={[StyleUtils.getWidthStyle(variables.w80)]}>


This is redundant StyleUtils.getWidthStyle(variables.w80), see this comment: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/62288/files#r2095739313

Before After

melvin-bot · 2025-05-19T13:57:34Z

@ikevin127 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 · 2025-05-19T14:21:05Z

🚧 @shawnborton has triggered a test app build. You can view the workflow run here.

github-actions · 2025-05-19T15:02:38Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, Desktop, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
Android 🤖🔄	iOS 🍎🔄
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/android/62288-hybrid/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/ios/62288-hybrid/index.html

Desktop 💻	Web 🕸️
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/desktop/62288/NewExpensify.dmg	https://62288.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

shawnborton · 2025-05-19T15:12:35Z

Did a quick test on iOS and this is feeling really good to me, let's get it into final review cc @ikevin127

ikevin127 · 2025-05-19T18:06:07Z

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 tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: Native
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- MacOS: Desktop
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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
- 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.js 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.
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

web.mov

MacOS: Desktop

desktop.mov

ikevin127

LGTM

mountiny

Thanks! @linhvovan29546 can you look into adding unit tests for this as a follow up? I think the logic around IOU x expense and to/from being defined or not would deserve unit tests that should be in this PR, but dont want to hold it so follow up will be the best

linhvovan29546 · 2025-05-20T12:22:14Z

Sure, I can add unit tests as a follow up

github-actions · 2025-05-21T18:31:16Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.48-0 🚀

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

github-actions · 2025-05-21T21:01:57Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.48-0 🚀

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

github-actions · 2025-05-22T10:53:56Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.1.49-5 🚀

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

github-actions · 2025-05-23T19:06:07Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/arosiclair in version: 9.1.50-0 🚀

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

fix: hide To recipient when From and To recipient are the same

377eab8

linhvovan29546 commented May 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/components/SelectionList/Search/ExpenseItemHeaderNarrow.tsx

linhvovan29546 commented May 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

linhvovan29546 marked this pull request as ready for review May 19, 2025 13:57

linhvovan29546 requested a review from a team as a code owner May 19, 2025 13:57

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from ikevin127 May 19, 2025 13:57

melvin-bot Bot removed the request for review from a team May 19, 2025 13:57

shawnborton requested a review from a team May 19, 2025 14:19

ikevin127 approved these changes May 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from mountiny May 19, 2025 20:29

mountiny assigned linhvovan29546 May 20, 2025

mountiny approved these changes May 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit a9a498c into Expensify:main May 20, 2025
19 of 25 checks passed

linhvovan29546 deleted the fix/62109-hide-to-recipient branch May 21, 2025 00:19

github-actions Bot mentioned this pull request May 21, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-05-21 #62497

Closed

ikevin127 mentioned this pull request May 23, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-06-05] [$250] Expense Reports - Arrow is shown next to submitter on the empty report when receiver is empty #62551

Closed

8 tasks

melvin-bot Bot mentioned this pull request May 23, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-05-30] [Better Expense Report View] [$250] Show the submitter avatar and name in the narrow expense report search result view #62109

Closed

16 tasks

Conversation

linhvovan29546 commented May 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

linhvovan29546 May 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

linhvovan29546 May 19, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shawnborton May 19, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

linhvovan29546 commented May 19, 2025

Uh oh!

linhvovan29546 May 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shawnborton May 19, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented May 19, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 19, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 19, 2025

Uh oh!

shawnborton commented May 19, 2025

Uh oh!

ikevin127 commented May 19, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

ikevin127 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

linhvovan29546 commented May 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 21, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 21, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 22, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 23, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

linhvovan29546 commented May 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

linhvovan29546 May 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

linhvovan29546 May 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

ikevin127 commented May 19, 2025 •

edited

Loading

linhvovan29546 commented May 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading