Skip to content

[Performance] Dismiss-first navigation for all remaining expense submission paths#90347

Merged
mountiny merged 13 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
software-mansion-labs:korytko/perf/cover-remaining-submit-paths
May 18, 2026
Merged

[Performance] Dismiss-first navigation for all remaining expense submission paths#90347
mountiny merged 13 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
software-mansion-labs:korytko/perf/cover-remaining-submit-paths

Conversation

@JakubKorytko
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@JakubKorytko JakubKorytko commented May 12, 2026

Explanation of Change

Improve perceived performance of expense submission from QAB/FAB across all IOU types (PAY, SPLIT, TRACK, SUBMIT/REQUEST) by adding dismiss-first navigation and deferred writes.

The RHP now animates closed while navigating to the destination underneath, and API writes are deferred until after the transition completes.

Also adds full telemetry coverage (startTracking, setFastPath, setPendingSubmitFollowUpAction) to skip-confirmation paths (scan, distance, split+receipt) that previously had none, enabling SubmitToDestinationVisible span measurement.

Fixed Issues

$ #90669
PROPOSAL: N/A

Tests

Prerequisite: For an action to appear in the QAB, you need to perform it once via FAB first (e.g. create a manual PAY expense via FAB so that PAY appears as the QAB action).

Expected behavior for all tests below:

  • From inbox (other report) / other tabs (Home, Account, Workspaces): The destination report should appear under the RHP before it closes (dismiss-first animation), and the expense should appear in the destination chat.
  • From inbox with opened target report or Spend with other tab than "expenses": The modal just dismisses.
  • From Spend -> Expenses: You should stay on Spend, a skeleton placeholder should appear briefly, then the expense should appear in the list.

For each of the test, verify you can see both [Sentry][ManualSubmitToDestinationVisible] Starting span and [Sentry][ManualSubmitToDestinationVisible] Ending span in console logs.

TRACK

  1. Open self-DM chat -> FAB -> Track expense -> go through full flow (amount, confirmation)
  2. From Inbox, Spend & Home/Account/Workspaces tab - tap QAB -> Track expense, enter amount
  3. Repeat step 2 but use "scan" this time.

PAY

  1. Open 1:1 chat -> FAB -> Send money -> go through full flow (amount, confirmation)
  2. From Inbox, Spend & Home/Account/Workspaces tab - tap QAB -> Pay, enter amount

SPLIT

  1. Open a group chat -> FAB -> Split expense -> go through full flow (amount, confirmation).
  2. From Inbox, Spend & Home/Account/Workspaces tab - tap QAB -> Split expense, enter amount.
  3. On Spend verify only your share appears - the parent split amount should NOT appear. Refresh and verify consistency.
  4. Repeat step 6 but use "scan" this time.

SUBMIT/REQUEST

  1. Open any workspace or 1:1 chat -> FAB -> Submit expense (amount, confirmation)
  2. From Inbox, Spend & Home/Account/Workspaces tab - tap QAB -> Submit expense, enter amount

INVOICE (FAB - full flow with confirmation)

  1. Go to home page -> FAB -> Send invoice -> go through full flow (recipient, amount, confirmation)
  2. Verify that the destination page appears under the RHP before it closes (dismiss-first animation)

Note: the full-screen option under 'RHP' is only visible on the wide layout, as the RHP is full-screen on the narrow layout. On narrow, the flow is simply faster than on main

Offline tests

Same as tests.

QA Steps

Same as test.

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
Pay
Pay_iOS.mov
Split, Split+Scan
Split_iOS.mov
Split+scan_iOS.mov
Track, Track+scan
Track_iOS.mov
Request money
Request_money_iOS.mov
Invoices
Invoices_iOS.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Pay
Pay.mov
Split, Split+Scan
Split.mov
Split+Scan.mov
Track, Track+scan
Track.mov
Request money
Request_money.mov
Invoices
Invoices.mov

@JakubKorytko JakubKorytko force-pushed the korytko/perf/cover-remaining-submit-paths branch 2 times, most recently from fe2d09a to 19595e6 Compare May 13, 2026 13:08
@JakubKorytko
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 19595e6e2d

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/components/Search/hooks/useStableOptimisticSortedData.ts Outdated
@JakubKorytko
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 604c61b6f4

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/components/Search/hooks/useStableOptimisticSortedData.ts
@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov Bot commented May 13, 2026

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
src/CONST/index.ts 92.30% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts 63.99% <100.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU/MoneyRequest.ts 77.26% <100.00%> (+0.66%) ⬆️
src/libs/actions/IOU/MoneyRequestBuilder.ts 83.58% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/actions/IOU/TrackExpense.ts 80.86% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts 91.20% <ø> (-0.80%) ⬇️
src/libs/telemetry/submitFollowUpAction.ts 37.58% <ø> (ø)
.../iou/request/step/confirmation/getSubmitHandler.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...st/step/confirmation/SubmitExpenseOrchestrator.tsx 58.10% <57.14%> (-0.11%) ⬇️
src/libs/actions/IOU/submitWithDismissFirst.ts 88.57% <88.57%> (ø)
... and 8 more
... and 18 files with indirect coverage changes

@JakubKorytko
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: a583674fdd

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts Outdated
@JakubKorytko
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 150ac852e6

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx
@JakubKorytko
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Can't wait for the next one!

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

@grgia grgia requested a review from Copilot May 13, 2026 15:51
@grgia
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

grgia commented May 13, 2026

:) @MelvinBot review

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Code Review

Well-structured PR. The extraction of submitWithDismissFirst and the two new Search hooks are good abstractions that reduce complexity in the already-large Search/index.tsx. A few items to flag:

Issues

1. useOptimisticSearchTracking — missing optimisticWatchKey dep in isOptimisticTrackingCleared check

In useOptimisticSearchTracking, the unified watch-key effect depends on [isOptimisticTrackingCleared, optimisticWatchKey, transactions], but at line 114 it reads tracking.hasPendingWriteOnMount from the mutable ref. If hasPendingWriteOnMount is set to true by rearmTracking() while isOptimisticTrackingCleared is still true (before the setIsOptimisticTrackingCleared(false) state update flushes), the effect will bail out early. This is likely fine in practice because rearmTracking calls both setIsOptimisticTrackingCleared(false) and setOptimisticWatchKey(latestKey) which will re-trigger the effect, but the transient inconsistency between the ref and the state is worth a comment to prevent future confusion.

2. OPTIMISTIC_ROLLBACK_GRACE_MS changed from OPTIMISTIC_TRACKING_TIMEOUT_MS * 0.3 (3s) to a hardcoded 3_000

The old code derived the rollback grace from the timeout (10_000 * 0.3 = 3_000), making the relationship explicit. The new code hardcodes both as separate constants in useStableOptimisticSortedData.ts. This is fine now but loses the semantic link — if someone bumps the timeout to 15s they won't know to revisit the grace period. Consider adding a brief comment noting the relationship.

3. sendMoney in IOURequestStepAmount.tsx — missing shouldHandleNavigation override

At the PAY QAB path (line ~1721), submitWithDismissFirst passes overrides to executeSendMoneyWrite, but only forwards shouldDeferForSearch. The shouldHandleNavigation override is not forwarded to sendMoneyElsewhere/sendMoneyWithWallet. This means the send-money action will still call dismissModalAndOpenReportInInboxTab internally even when submitWithDismissFirst already handled navigation (destination-report branch). Compare with IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx line ~1914 where handleSendMoney correctly forwards both overrides.

4. useStableOptimisticSortedDataoptimisticWatchKey missing from useEffect deps

The effect at line 314 reads tracking.optimisticWatchKey from the mutable ref but also uses the optimisticWatchKey state (indirectly via setOptimisticWatchKey). The optimisticWatchKey state variable is not in the dependency array — this is likely intentional (the effect is driven by sortedData changes), but the linter would flag it. Worth an eslint-disable comment explaining why.

Suggestions (non-blocking)

  • The searchDataWithOptimisticTransaction IIFE in useOptimisticSearchTracking could be a useMemo for clarity that it's a derived value. The IIFE works but reads as imperative.
  • handleDismissToReport in SubmitExpenseOrchestrator.tsx has a fallback that uses double-requestAnimationFrame matching handleDefaultSubmit. Consider extracting that shared pattern to avoid the two implementations drifting.
  • The WriteOverrides type is defined in submitWithDismissFirst.ts and re-imported in MoneyRequest.ts. Since it's just {shouldHandleNavigation?: boolean; shouldDeferForSearch?: boolean}, consider whether it could live in a shared types file to reduce the coupling between the orchestration module and the action modules.

Good

  • Comprehensive test coverage: submitWithDismissFirstTest.ts (280 lines) covers all three branches, priority ordering, and edge cases. getSubmitHandlerTest.ts additions cover the new DISMISS_TO_REPORT handler and priority interactions.
  • The shared mock (tests/__mocks__/submitWithDismissFirst.ts) is a clean approach for keeping existing tests working without full Navigation mocks.
  • The refactor of sendMoneyElsewhere/sendMoneyWithWallet into a shared executeSendMoney in SendMoney.ts is a good deduplication.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR extends the “dismiss-first” expense submission optimization across remaining IOU submission paths, deferring expensive optimistic writes until after navigation transitions and expanding telemetry + Search optimistic-item handling to better measure “submit-to-destination-visible” performance.

Changes:

  • Introduces a shared submitWithDismissFirst() orchestrator for skip-confirmation submit flows and threads new shouldDeferForSearch / shouldHandleNavigation overrides through IOU actions.
  • Adds a new submit handler path (DISMISS_TO_REPORT) and updates submit decision logic + tests to cover destination-report flows (SPLIT/TRACK) more consistently.
  • Refactors Search optimistic tracking into dedicated hooks and adds scoped filtering overrides to keep the tracked optimistic item visible until server data arrives.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 23 out of 23 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
tests/unit/submitWithDismissFirstTest.ts New unit coverage for the shared dismiss-first submit orchestrator branches.
tests/unit/getSubmitHandlerTest.ts Updates decision-tree tests for new snapshot shape and new handler paths.
tests/ui/IOURequestStepAmountDraftTest.tsx Mocks submitWithDismissFirst for UI tests to keep Navigation mocking minimal.
tests/actions/IOU/MoneyRequestTest.ts Adjusts IOU action tests for new write override params and shared mock.
tests/mocks/submitWithDismissFirst.ts Shared test mock that bypasses dismiss-first orchestration.
src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx Adds dismiss-first handling for PAY in confirmation step; resolves destination report IDs more robustly.
src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepAmount.tsx Uses submitWithDismissFirst for skip-confirmation amount-entry submissions (PAY/SUBMIT/TRACK).
src/pages/iou/request/step/confirmation/useExpenseSubmission.ts Threads shouldDeferForSearch / shouldHandleNavigation through submit paths; adds options to sendMoney.
src/pages/iou/request/step/confirmation/SubmitExpenseOrchestrator.tsx Adds DISMISS_TO_REPORT handler and improves deferred-channel selection for Search-preserving flows.
src/pages/iou/request/step/confirmation/getSubmitHandler.ts Extends submit handler decision tree for destination-report flows and new handler type.
src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts Adds optimisticTransactionID to prevent filtering the tracked optimistic item out of status tabs.
src/libs/actions/IOU/types/CreateTrackExpenseParams.ts Adds shouldDeferForSearch to track-expense action params.
src/libs/actions/IOU/TrackExpense.ts Respects explicit shouldDeferForSearch when deciding whether to defer writes.
src/libs/actions/IOU/submitWithDismissFirst.ts New shared dismiss-first orchestration + telemetry setup for skip-confirmation flows.
src/libs/actions/IOU/Split.ts Adds deferred-write support and optional navigation handling for split flows.
src/libs/actions/IOU/SendMoney.ts Adds deferred-write support + optional telemetry start for send-money flows.
src/libs/actions/IOU/MoneyRequestBuilder.ts Extends request params to pass shouldDeferForSearch.
src/libs/actions/IOU/MoneyRequest.ts Applies dismiss-first orchestration to scan/distance skip-confirmation flows and threads overrides.
src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts Extends split action params with navigation/defer overrides.
src/CONST/index.ts Adds a new telemetry fast-path handler enum value (DISMISS_TO_REPORT).
src/components/Search/index.tsx Refactors optimistic tracking into hooks and integrates optimistic transaction injection + stable sorted data.
src/components/Search/hooks/useStableOptimisticSortedData.ts New hook to cache/re-inject the optimistic row and manage rollback cleanup.
src/components/Search/hooks/useOptimisticSearchTracking.ts New hook to manage watch-key resolution, split-parent swap, and Search-data augmentation.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Comment thread src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepAmount.tsx Outdated
Comment thread src/libs/actions/IOU/submitWithDismissFirst.ts
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 24 out of 24 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.

@JakubKorytko
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 5094dd97b1

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/components/Search/hooks/useStableOptimisticSortedData.ts
@JakubKorytko
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 24 out of 24 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.

@ShridharGoel
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ShridharGoel commented May 15, 2026

The redirection to spend is not happening from home tab

Edit: Same thing is happening on staging for the account. So NAB for this PR.

Screen.Recording.2026-05-15.at.8.00.28.PM.mov

Comment thread src/components/Search/hooks/useOptimisticSearchTracking.ts
Comment thread src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepConfirmation.tsx Outdated
Comment thread src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepAmount.tsx Outdated
Comment thread src/components/Search/hooks/useStableOptimisticSortedData.ts
Comment on lines +43 to +44
shouldHandleNavigation?: boolean;
shouldDeferForSearch?: boolean;
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.

docs

@mountiny mountiny merged commit ff23777 into Expensify:main May 18, 2026
50 checks passed
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.3.76-0 🚀

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

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No help site changes required.

This PR is a pure performance optimization (dismiss-first navigation and deferred writes for expense submission). It doesn't change any user-facing features, workflows, terminology, or UI elements — users still submit expenses the same way, it just feels faster.

The help site articles covering expense submission (Create-an-Expense.md, Track-Expenses.md, Split-Expenses.md, Send-an-Invoice.md, Expense-and-Report-Actions.md, etc.) describe what happens after submission but not how the UI transitions, so there's nothing to update.

@izarutskaya
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@JakubKorytko QAB is not updated after selecting "Send invoice". Is it expected behavior?

Bug7158141_1779208296435.RPReplay_Final1779202895.mp4
bandicam.2026-05-19.21-03-56-252.mp4

@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.3.77-3 🚀

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

@JakubKorytko
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@izarutskaya yep, that's how it was before the PR already, not sure if bug or by design but not caused by the PR itself.

@izarutskaya
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@JakubKorytko Could you please check this issue #91126 ?

@JakubKorytko
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Yeah, will take a look tomorrow but I see that for this QAB confirmation page was not skipped - need to check if before the PR was merged it behaved the same. Because for normal expenses it navigates to Spend from Home, for skip-confirmation QAB it navigates to Inbox. Not sure about non skip QABs. Good catch anyway, will probably just revert locally and see what happens then, thanks!

@izarutskaya
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Thank you!

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.

9 participants