Add multi-segment dynamic route suffix support and migrate add-bank-account/verify-account by collectioneur · Pull Request #83701 · Expensify/App

collectioneur · 2026-02-27T14:56:15Z

Explanation of Change

This PR adds multi-segment dynamic route suffix support and migrates the Add Bank Account Verify Account screen to use it.
The old getLastSuffixFromPath only matched single-segment suffixes. New findMatchingDynamicSuffix checks sub-suffixes longest-first, so add-bank-account/verify-account matches correctly without colliding with verify-account.
Removed the static route/screen/params, renamed the page to DynamicAddBankAccountVerifyAccountPage, updated callers to use createDynamicRoute.

Fixed Issues

$ #83363
$ #83551

Tests

Preconditions
Account A: Active account with created workspace and linked bank account.
Account B: Fresh, unverified account with no bank account added.

Initial Setup:

Using Account B, create an expense where Account A owes Account B.
Log in to Account A, submit, and pay the created expense.

Test Case 1: "Add Bank Account" flow via Expense Reports
Steps:

Log in to Account B.
Navigate to Reports > Expenses.
Open the expense created in the preconditions.
Locate and click the "Add bank account" button within the expense chat.
Reload the page.

Expected Result 1: The page reloads successfully without errors, and the UI state remains consistent, URL: /search/view/3204037071619365/add-bank-account/verify-account?...".

Enter the magic code.

Expected Result 2: The system successfully navigates the user to the "Add bank account" flow.

Test Case 2: "Add Bank Account" flow via Chats
Steps:

Log in to Account B.
Navigate to Reports > Chats.
Open the chat associated with the created expense.
Click the "Add bank account" button.
Reload the page.

Expected Result 1: The page reloads successfully without errors, and the UI state remains consistent, URL: /search/add-bank-account/verify-account?q=....

Enter the magic code.

Expected Result 2: The system successfully navigates the user to the "Add bank account" flow.

Test Case 3: "Add Bank Account" flow via Wallet Settings
Steps:

Log in to Account B.
Navigate to Settings > Wallet.
Click the "Add bank account" button.

Expected Result 1: The "Verify Account" page is displayed, and the URL correctly updates to /settings/wallet/add-bank-account/verify-account.

Reload the page.

Expected Result 2: The page reloads correctly, the user remains on the same URL, and the UI state is preserved without errors.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-03-06.at.10.50.36.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-03-02.at.15.53.55.mov

codecov · 2026-02-27T15:03:55Z

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/ROUTES.ts	`15.35% <ø> (+0.01%)`	⬆️
src/SCREENS.ts	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/hooks/useDynamicBackPath.ts	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
...bs/Navigation/helpers/findMatchingDynamicSuffix.ts	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/libs/Navigation/helpers/getPathFromState.ts	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
.../Navigation/helpers/getPathWithoutDynamicSuffix.ts	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/libs/Navigation/helpers/getStateFromPath.ts	`86.95% <100.00%> (ø)`
...rc/libs/Navigation/helpers/isDynamicRouteSuffix.ts	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
...igation/linkingConfig/RELATIONS/SETTINGS_TO_RHP.ts	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts	`75.00% <ø> (ø)`
... and 5 more
... and 17 files with indirect coverage changes

jmusial

Would be good to have an example of adding an account (full flow) on the video as well

jmusial · 2026-02-27T15:56:09Z

-        const backPath = `${backPathWithoutQuery}${query ? `?${query}` : ''}`;
-
-        return backPath as Route;
+        return removeDynamicSuffixFromPath(pathWithoutLeadingSlash, dynamicRouteSuffix) as Route;


Can't we just return Route from removeDynamicSuffixFromPath instead of mapping it here ?

jmusial · 2026-02-27T16:01:14Z

+ * @param path - The path to find the matching dynamic suffix for
+ * @returns The matching dynamic suffix, or undefined if no matching suffix is found
+ */
+function findMatchingDynamicSuffix(path: string | undefined): string | undefined {


Suggested change

function findMatchingDynamicSuffix(path: string | undefined): string | undefined {

function findMatchingDynamicSuffix(path = ''): string | undefined {

jmusial · 2026-02-27T16:04:47Z

+ * @param dynamicSuffix - The dynamic suffix to strip (e.g., 'verify-account')
+ * @returns The path with the suffix removed and query params re-appended
+ */
+function removeDynamicSuffixFromPath(fullPath: string, dynamicSuffix: string): string {


Missing test

…ing tests for removeDynamicSuffixFromPath function

melvin-bot · 2026-03-04T09:54:29Z

@huult 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]

JmillsExpensify

All these test cases and expected results look right to me, so approving for product. cc @joekaufmanexpensify in case you want to take a look at this PR, since it's your area.

huult · 2026-03-05T15:08:51Z

@collectioneur please resovle the conflict!

huult · 2026-03-05T15:20:28Z

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

Screen.Recording.2026-03-06.at.14.33.43.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-03-06.at.14.38.02.mp4

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-03-06.at.14.45.05.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-03-06.at.14.48.06.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-03-06.at.14.20.46.mp4

Screen.Recording.2026-03-06.at.14.23.08.mp4

huult · 2026-03-05T15:30:58Z

@collectioneur I think you should record a screenshot on mobile as well, at least on one version, to make sure it works correctly on mobile.

huult · 2026-03-06T08:42:41Z


            // Fallback to not found page so users can't land on dynamic suffix directly.
-            if (pathWithoutDynamicSuffix === '/' || pathWithoutDynamicSuffix === '') {
+            if ((pathWithoutDynamicSuffix as string) === '/' || (pathWithoutDynamicSuffix as string) === '') {


I noticed getPathWithoutDynamicSuffix is typed to return Route, but pathWithoutDynamicSuffix is cast to string.

Maybe we should update getPathWithoutDynamicSuffix to allow returning '/' instead of relying on a string cast.

huult

LGTM!

github-actions · 2026-03-06T11:24:12Z

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

OSBotify · 2026-03-06T11:27:00Z

✋ 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 · 2026-03-06T11:28:34Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #83701.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-7f033bb-5430cbd-9eba66f84415d5769f4f6c4deadc0b5869c2bc16/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-7f033bb-5430cbd-40aca5860ad240782784277d27d7a632bce92337/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://83701.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-03-06T23:02:35Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mjasikowski in version: 9.3.33-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-03-09T20:37:51Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.3.33-5 🚀

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

collectioneur added 2 commits February 27, 2026 13:14

add logic for handling multisuffixes in dynamic routes

b9d42c4

refactor AddBankAccountVerifyAccount to use dynamic routes

07d03cf

melvin-bot Bot assigned collectioneur Feb 27, 2026

collectioneur changed the title ~~Collectioneur/dynamic routes multisuffixes~~ Add multi-segment dynamic route suffix support and migrate add-bank-account/verify-account Feb 27, 2026

jmusial suggested changes Feb 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

huult mentioned this pull request Mar 2, 2026

[BT-129] Migrate Reports - Core (Part 1) #83365

Open

5 tasks

collectioneur added 4 commits March 2, 2026 15:53

Refactor dynamic route handling by improving type definitions and add…

5ae9eed

…ing tests for removeDynamicSuffixFromPath function

Merge branch 'main' into collectioneur/dynamic-routes-multisuffixes

5c5cd21

rename removeDynamicSuffixFromPath to getPathWithoutDynamicSuffix

36b4338

update documentation

e308906

WojtekBoman approved these changes Mar 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

collectioneur marked this pull request as ready for review March 4, 2026 09:54

collectioneur requested review from a team as code owners March 4, 2026 09:54

melvin-bot Bot requested review from JmillsExpensify and huult March 4, 2026 09:54

melvin-bot Bot removed request for a team March 4, 2026 09:54

JmillsExpensify previously approved these changes Mar 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

huult reviewed Mar 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into collectioneur/dynamic-routes-multisuffixes

7f96723

collectioneur dismissed JmillsExpensify’s stale review via 7f96723 March 6, 2026 09:55

collectioneur added 2 commits March 6, 2026 11:31

remove type assertion

2700306

remove unnecessary return type assertion

8ae8ea2

huult approved these changes Mar 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from mjasikowski March 6, 2026 10:59

mjasikowski approved these changes Mar 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

mjasikowski merged commit 7f033bb into Expensify:main Mar 6, 2026
30 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-03-06 #84466

Closed

52 tasks

This was referenced Mar 9, 2026

[BT-152] Migrate Settings - Security/Wallet/Subscription #83363

Open

[BT-008] Implement Dynamic Suffix Layering #83551

Closed

	function findMatchingDynamicSuffix(path: string \| undefined): string \| undefined {
	function findMatchingDynamicSuffix(path = ''): string \| undefined {

Conversation

collectioneur commented Feb 27, 2026 • 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!

codecov Bot commented Feb 27, 2026 • edited by github-actions Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

jmusial left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jmusial Feb 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jmusial Feb 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jmusial Feb 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Mar 4, 2026

Uh oh!

JmillsExpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

huult commented Mar 5, 2026

Uh oh!

huult commented Mar 5, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

huult commented Mar 5, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

huult Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

huult left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Mar 9, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

collectioneur commented Feb 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Feb 27, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

huult commented Mar 5, 2026 •

edited

Loading

huult commented Mar 5, 2026 •

edited

Loading