Skip to content

Derive the distance draft expense type from the selected tab - #97310

Open
wildan-m wants to merge 5 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
wildan-m:wildan/92598-distance-tab-waypoint-notfound
Open

Derive the distance draft expense type from the selected tab#97310
wildan-m wants to merge 5 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
wildan-m:wildan/92598-distance-tab-waypoint-notfound

Conversation

@wildan-m

@wildan-m wildan-m commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

Tapping a Start or Stop waypoint on the Map tab opens the "Not here" page instead of the waypoint editor once an Odometer expense has been created earlier in the session. Leaving the flow clears the draft expense, so reopening it has to derive the expense type again — and that derivation preferred the last distance expense the user created over the tab that is actually on screen. The tab navigator restores the tab that was last selected, so the two disagree as soon as someone creates an Odometer expense and later switches to Map: the visible tab is Map, but the draft is rebuilt as an Odometer expense, which carries no waypoints. The Map tab renders placeholder Start and Stop rows regardless of the underlying draft, so the list looks normal until a row is tapped and the editor finds no waypoints to open.

Deriving the type from the selected tab keeps the rebuilt draft aligned with the tab the navigator is showing, so a Map tab always sits over a map expense with its waypoints seeded. The last-created type stays as the next fallback, so opening the flow before any tab has been selected still lands on the type used last.

Fixed Issues

$ #92598
PROPOSAL: #92598 (comment)

Tests

  1. Open a workspace that has distance rates enabled, and open its workspace chat.
  2. Open an expense report in that chat.
  3. Tap the + icon > Track expense > select the Odometer tab, and create an odometer expense by uploading the start and end images.
  4. Close the RHP to go back to the report view, then open the report again.
  5. Tap the + icon > Track expense > select the Map tab, then close the RHP.
  6. Tap the + icon > Track expense again, and tap either the Start or Stop waypoint.
  7. Verify the waypoint editor opens and the "Not here" page does not appear.
  8. Verify the remembered-tab behavior still works: switch to the Odometer tab, close and reopen Track expense, and confirm it opens on the Odometer tab with the odometer fields.
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

The rebuilt draft expense is derived entirely from locally stored values, so the behavior is unchanged offline. Turn off the network connection and repeat the steps above; the waypoint editor still opens on the Map tab.

QA Steps

Same as tests.

  • 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
  • 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.
  • 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
Kapture.2026-07-29.at.23.38.56.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
Kapture.2026-07-29.at.23.42.39.mp4
iOS: Native
Kapture.2026-07-29.at.23.24.56.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
Kapture.2026-07-29.at.23.28.51.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Kapture.2026-07-29.at.22.18.58.mp4

@wildan-m
wildan-m marked this pull request as ready for review July 29, 2026 16:44
@wildan-m
wildan-m requested review from a team as code owners July 29, 2026 16:44
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from linhvovan29546 and removed request for a team July 29, 2026 16:44
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 29, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@linhvovan29546 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]

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from flaviadefaria and removed request for a team July 29, 2026 16:44
@linhvovan29546

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. What shall we delve into next?

Reviewed commit: 4aa8fb8108

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".

@linhvovan29546

linhvovan29546 commented Jul 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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 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 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)
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately
    • 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
    • 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 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.
  • 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
telegram-cloud-document-5-6300690278470654991.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
telegram-cloud-document-5-6300690278470654992.mp4
iOS: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2026-08-02.at.11.10.51.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-08-02.at.11.00.28.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-08-02.at.10.57.59.mov

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested a review from danieldoglas August 2, 2026 04:14
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.

2 participants