Skip to content

fix: Tags - List jumps to “Show More” when selecting tag after 500.#66780

Merged
rafecolton merged 16 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
Krishna2323:krishna2323/issue/65977
Aug 5, 2025
Merged

fix: Tags - List jumps to “Show More” when selecting tag after 500.#66780
rafecolton merged 16 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
Krishna2323:krishna2323/issue/65977

Conversation

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Krishna2323 Krishna2323 commented Jul 21, 2025

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #65977
PROPOSAL: #65977 (comment)

Tests

Pre-condition: import tags using: Bug6885040_1752262047947!Over_500_tags (1).csv

  1. Go to workspace settings - tags
  2. Scroll down and try to select tags before 500 and after 500
  3. Verify selecting a tag after the first 500, shows the selected tag
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Pre-condition: import tags using: Bug6885040_1752262047947!Over_500_tags (1).csv

  1. Go to workspace settings - tags
  2. Scroll down and try to select tags before 500 and after 500
  3. Verify selecting a tag after the first 500, shows the selected tag

QA Steps

Pre-condition: import tags using: Bug6885040_1752262047947!Over_500_tags (1).csv

  1. Go to workspace settings - tags
  2. Scroll down and try to select tags before 500 and after 500
  3. Verify selecting a tag after the first 500, shows the selected tag
  • 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
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • 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 verified the translation was requested/reviewed 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.js 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 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.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
android_native.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android_chrome.mp4
iOS: Native
ios_native.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios_safari.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web_chrome.mp4
MacOS: Desktop
desktop_app.mp4

Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <belivethatkg@gmail.com>
@Krishna2323 Krishna2323 marked this pull request as ready for review July 21, 2025 07:45
@Krishna2323 Krishna2323 requested a review from a team as a code owner July 21, 2025 07:45
@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested review from hoangzinh and removed request for a team July 21, 2025 07:45
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 21, 2025

@hoangzinh 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]

Comment thread src/pages/TeachersUnite/ImTeacherPage.tsx
}
// Reset the current page to 1 when the user types something
setCurrentPage(1);
onCurrentPageChange?.();
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.

Why do we need to add this callback?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's for the unit tests.

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.

It's not a good reason to add those callbacks if they're only used for testing purposes.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I have seen that type of case before and also I don't think there's any other way to add tests. Do you think we should remove the tests?

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.

Is it possible to test behaviors over callback here? I mean when the current page is reset, we expect user won't see items on page 2.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Okay, trying

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@hoangzinh tests updated.

// Reset the current page to 1 when the user types something
setCurrentPage(1);

onFocusReset?.();
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.

Why do we need to have this?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's for the unit tests.

Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <belivethatkg@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <belivethatkg@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <belivethatkg@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <belivethatkg@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <belivethatkg@gmail.com>
Comment thread tests/unit/BaseSelectionListTest.tsx Outdated
expect(screen.getByTestId(`${CONST.BASE_LIST_ITEM_TEST_ID}50`)).toBeTruthy();
expect(screen.getByTestId(`${CONST.BASE_LIST_ITEM_TEST_ID}99`)).toBeTruthy();

// Should not show, Show more button as we rendered whole list and search text was not changed
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.

Suggested change
// Should not show, Show more button as we rendered whole list and search text was not changed
// Should not show "Show more" button as we rendered whole list and search text was not changed

Comment on lines +232 to +238
rerender(
<BaseListItemRenderer
sections={[{data: largeMockSections.map((item, index) => ({...item, isSelected: index === 3}))}]}
canSelectMultiple={false}
initialNumToRender={110}
/>,
);
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.

rerender to mock sections look here looks incorrect to me. Btw, we should simulate the behavior that user tap on the checkbox, not the "show more" button.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why does re-rendering seem incorrect to you? We just need to update the selected options array and ensure that the currentPage is not reset to 1. I think this is the correct way to handle it.

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.

I'm expecting we should simulate press checkbox like this

fireEvent.press(screen.getByTestId(`${CONST.BASE_LIST_ITEM_TEST_ID}1`));

Re-render only makes sense if the props is updated from outside like this

it('should update focused item when sections are updated from BE', () => {
(NativeNavigation.useIsFocused as jest.Mock).mockReturnValue(true);
const updatedMockSections = mockSections.map((section) => ({
...section,
isSelected: section.keyForList === '2',
}));
const {rerender} = render(<BaseListItemRenderer sections={[{data: mockSections}]} />);
expect(screen.getByTestId(`${CONST.BASE_LIST_ITEM_TEST_ID}1`)).toBeSelected();
rerender(<BaseListItemRenderer sections={[{data: updatedMockSections}]} />);
expect(screen.getByTestId(`${CONST.BASE_LIST_ITEM_TEST_ID}2`)).toBeSelected();
});

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.

From this recording #66780 (comment). Are you saying that we can't write test for this simulate press checkbox case?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We can simulate a checkbox press, but it will have no effect because the options with property isSelected come from the parent component, which uses SelectionList. The selected options only change if the parent component handles the onSelectRow callback and provides updated sections to the SelectionList via sections={[{data: updatedLargeMockSections}]}.

    it('does not reset page when only selectedOptions changes', async () => {
        render(
            <BaseListItemRenderer
                sections={[{data: largeMockSections}]}
                canSelectMultiple
                initialNumToRender={600}
                listItem={TableListItem}
            />,
        );

        await waitForBatchedUpdatesWithAct();

        // Click Show More button
        fireEvent.press(screen.getByText('common.showMore'));
        fireEvent.press(screen.getByTestId(`TableListItemCheckbox-Item 598`));
        expect(onSelectRowMock).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1);

        await waitForBatchedUpdatesWithAct();
        // Should now show items from second page
        expect(screen.getByTestId(`${CONST.BASE_LIST_ITEM_TEST_ID}500`)).toBeTruthy();
        expect(screen.getByTestId(`${CONST.BASE_LIST_ITEM_TEST_ID}503`)).toBeTruthy();

        // Should not show, "Show more" button as we rendered whole list and search text was not changed
        expect(screen.queryByText('common.showMore')).toBeFalsy();
    });

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@hoangzinh, this PR is reverted again, should we wait?

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Krishna2323 is there any reason why we have to wait?

Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <belivethatkg@gmail.com>
@Krishna2323
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Never mind, I thought of something else. I think we should proceed without waiting for the other PR. I have resolved the merge conflicts.

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Krishna2323 can you take a look at my comment here #66780 (comment)? Thank you

Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <belivethatkg@gmail.com>
@Krishna2323
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@hoangzinh, on workspace list pages, the current page doesn’t reset to page 1 when the search input changes. However, on the participants page, it does reset to page 1 after a search. Should we fix this?

I think no, because resetting makes sense when selected options appear at the top of the list (like on the participants page). But for workspace lists, we shouldn’t reset the page. What do you think?

This doesn’t seem related to the bug we’re solving, but we should confirm and address it if necessary.

PS: I updated MAX_SELECTION_LIST_PAGE_LENGTH to 10 for testing.

cc: @Expensify/design

Monosnap.screencast.2025-07-28.10-02-59.mp4

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I agreed that we should leave it as it is until we have a real reported issue/bug with it.

@hoangzinh
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

hoangzinh commented Jul 29, 2025

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
    • 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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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
Screen.Recording.2025-07-30.at.06.03.10.android.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2025-07-30.at.05.38.53.android.chrome.mov
iOS: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2025-07-30.at.06.14.34.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-07-30.at.06.06.25.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-07-30.at.05.27.35.web.mov
MacOS: Desktop
Screen.Recording.2025-07-30.at.05.32.55.desktop.mov

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot requested a review from rafecolton July 29, 2025 23:16
@rafecolton
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Krishna2323 @hoangzinh can you please re-test on main and see if this issue still occurs? I came to review this and noticed @mvtglobally's comment here that this is no longer reproducible 🤔

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@rafecolton issue is still reproducible:

Monosnap.screencast.2025-08-01.09-08-40.mp4

rafecolton
rafecolton previously approved these changes Aug 5, 2025
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@rafecolton rafecolton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@rafecolton
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@Krishna2323 Can you please merge main and resolve conflicts?

Signed-off-by: krishna2323 <belivethatkg@gmail.com>
@Krishna2323
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@rafecolton conflicts resolved.

@rafecolton rafecolton merged commit d639c6f into Expensify:main Aug 5, 2025
19 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Aug 5, 2025

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

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Aug 6, 2025

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/rafecolton in version: 9.1.90-0 🚀

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

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented Aug 8, 2025

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 9.1.90-11 🚀

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

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