[HOLD for payment 2024-01-17] [$500] Web - IOU & Task - User is redirected to previous page when double clicking outside RHP editor

[lanitochka17]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 1.4.15-4
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail:
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers):
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team
Slack conversation:

Action Performed:

1. Go to request details view of IOU/task report
2. Click on any field to open RHP
3. Double click outside RHP

Expected Result:

User stays on the same page

Actual Result:

User is returned to previous page

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6323095_1703186404581.bandicam_2023-12-22_00-55-18-770.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01b870d525be430c1d
• Upwork Job ID: 1737945433358630912
• Last Price Increase: 2023-12-21
• Automatic offers:
• tienifr | Contributor | 28070388

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01b870d525be430c1d

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @mallenexpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

Bug0 Triage Checklist (Main S/O)

• This "bug" occurs on a supported platform (ensure Platforms in OP are ✅)
• This bug is not a duplicate report (check E/App issues and #expensify-bugs)
  • If it is, comment with a link to the original report, close the issue and add any novel details to the original issue instead
• This bug is reproducible using the reproduction steps in the OP. S/O
  • If the reproduction steps are clear and you're unable to reproduce the bug, check with the reporter and QA first, then close the issue.
  • If the reproduction steps aren't clear and you determine the correct steps, please update the OP.
• This issue is filled out as thoroughly and clearly as possible
  • Pay special attention to the title, results, platforms where the bug occurs, and if the bug happens on staging/production.
• I have reviewed and subscribed to the linked Slack conversation to ensure Slack/Github stay in sync

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @thesahindia (External)

[gijoe0295]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Double clicking overlay navigates back.

What is the root cause of that problem?

This happens to all RHP screens.

We navigate back on pressing the Overlay here:

App/src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/RightModalNavigator.tsx

Line 26 in ad634d1

<View style={styles.RHPNavigatorContainer(isSmallScreenWidth)}>

Since Overlay is wrapped in an animated view, it may not unmount yet, causing onPress to be triggered twice on double clicking.

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We should create a state/ref to check if onPress has already been triggered before in Overlay. This is to avoid future issues if we reused Overlay.

const onPressWrapper = () => {
  if (!shouldTriggerOnPress) {
      return;
  }
  onPress();
  setShouldTriggerOnPress(false);
}

<PressableWithoutFeedback
  onPress={onPressWrapper}
/>

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

NA

[ZhenjaHorbach]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Web - IOU & Task - User is redirected to previous page when double clicking outside RHP editor

What is the root cause of that problem?

The main problem is that when we click on Overlay
We have time to do it again
As a result we navigate back again

App/src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/RightModalNavigator.tsx

Line 25 in ad634d1

{!isSmallScreenWidth && <Overlay onPress={navigation.goBack} />}

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We just need to bind the overlay to the navigation state
And as soon as we press on Overlay the first time
The RHP will be out of focus

    const isFocused = useIsFocused(); // Also we can use navigation.isFocused()

    const onPressOverlay = () => {
        if (isFocused) {
            navigation.goBack();
        }
    };

And we won't be able to reuse the overlay

App/src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/RightModalNavigator.tsx

Line 25 in ad634d1

{!isSmallScreenWidth && <Overlay onPress={navigation.goBack} />}

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

NA

[tienifr]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

Task - User is redirected to previous page when double clicking outside RHP editor

What is the root cause of that problem?

When press outside RHP, the overlay is not close immediately, so users can press 2 or even more times on overlay

-> navigation.goBack is called many times

App/src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/Navigators/RightModalNavigator.tsx

Line 25 in ad634d1

{!isSmallScreenWidth && <Overlay onPress={navigation.goBack} />}

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We should not create the new state to prevent unnecessary re-renders. Beside, onPress is called async so the state may not be updated before the second call

Solution 1: Just create the new ref

const isExecutingRef = useRef<boolean>(false);
<Overlay onPress={()=>{
                if(isExecutingRef.current){
                    return;
                }
                navigation.goBack()
                isExecutingRef.current=true
            }} />

Solution 2: We can edit the hook useSingleExecution

Currently this hook is not supported on web, we can change it as blow

export default function useSingleExecution() {
    const isExecutingRef = useRef<boolean>(false);

    const singleExecution = useCallback(
        <T extends unknown[]>(action: Action<T>) =>
            (...params: T) => {
                if(isExecutingRef.current){
                    return;
                }   
                action(...params);
                isExecutingRef.current = true
            },
        [],
    );

    return {isExecuting: isExecutingRef.current, singleExecution};
}

[gijoe0295]

Using useSingleExecution for Web can cause this issue: #24482 (comment). I think we should note this in source file to avoid future issues.

[mallenexpensify]

@thesahindia plz review the proposals above.

[thesahindia]

@tienifr's proposal looks good!

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @blimpich, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[blimpich]

Sounds good! @tienifr you are assigned, please feel free to create a PR for us to review 🙂

[melvin-bot]

📣 @tienifr 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[gijoe0295]

@thesahindia I wonder why I have the same solution but was not selected. The only difference is about using state or ref which is implementation details. There were many proposals that initially proposed using state but then implemented with ref.

[mallenexpensify]

@thesahindia can you please provide details on why @tienifr 's proposal was selected above others that were posted before? Thx
@blimpich can you please review the PR?

[melvin-bot]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 1.4.23-4 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: prevent double click outside RHP #33640

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2024-01-17. 🎊

For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:

• @thesahindia requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @tienifr requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)

[melvin-bot]

BugZero Checklist: The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed:

• [@thesahindia] The PR that introduced the bug has been identified. Link to the PR:
• [@thesahindia] The offending PR has been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake. Link to comment:
• [@thesahindia] A discussion in #expensify-bugs has been started about whether any other steps should be taken (e.g. updating the PR review checklist) in order to catch this type of bug sooner. Link to discussion:
• [@thesahindia] Determine if we should create a regression test for this bug.
• [@thesahindia] If we decide to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.
• [@mallenexpensify] Link the GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon:

[melvin-bot]

@blimpich, @mallenexpensify, @thesahindia, @tienifr Uh oh! This issue is overdue by 2 days. Don't forget to update your issues!

[mallenexpensify]

@thesahindia can you please address my question above?
#33460 (comment)

@thesahindia can you also plz complete the regression test steps?

Contributor: @tienifr paid $500 via Upwork
Contributor+: @thesahindia owed $500 via NewDot

[melvin-bot]

@blimpich, @mallenexpensify, @thesahindia, @tienifr Huh... This is 4 days overdue. Who can take care of this?

[thesahindia]

@thesahindia can you please provide details on why @tienifr 's proposal was selected above others that were posted before? Thx

For such minor issues I also look for small details. Since @tienifr suggested the correct implementation details I preferred going with them. Also they added the reason for not using the state and it shows they tested things thoroughly.

[thesahindia]

Not sure if there's any PR that is responsible for this, I think we can skip the checklist.

We don't need to add a test case. It's a normal flow and the expected behaviour is obvious.

[mallenexpensify]

Thanks @thesahindia !

[JmillsExpensify]

$500 approved for @thesahindia