Expense - Unable to delete Formula report field from Report after it is deleted in settings #75926

lorretheboy · 2025-11-24T19:31:20Z

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #74823
PROPOSAL: #74823 (comment)

Tests

Precondition:
User has created Text and Formula type report field in workspace settings > Reports

Go to staging.new.expensify.com
Go to workspace chat
Create a report
Go to workspace settings > Reports
Delete both Text and Formula type report fields
Go back to workspace chat
Open the report created in Step 3
Click Text type report field
Click 3-dot menu on RHP > Delete
Delete the report field
Click Formula type report field
Verify that Formula type report field should be removable like Text type (or List or Date report field) when it is deleted in workspace settings > Reports

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.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

WEBSITE.ANDROID.mov

iOS: Native

IOS.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

WEBSITE.IOS.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

WEBSITE.mov

codecov · 2025-11-24T19:39:40Z

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/pages/EditReportFieldText.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...RequestReportView/MoneyRequestViewReportFields.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
src/pages/EditReportFieldPage.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 20 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2025-11-25T11:49:17Z

@Ollyws 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]

trjExpensify

Makes sense formula can be deleted as well 👍

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

Ollyws · 2025-11-26T09:39:29Z

The formula field isn't showing up atall for me after an expense is added to the report, but it does so on staging:

Screen.Recording.2025-11-26.at.10.36.37.mov

lorretheboy · 2025-11-26T10:11:06Z

Lemme check it shortly

lorretheboy · 2025-11-26T18:40:03Z

@Ollyws Please check again. I fixed it

Ollyws · 2025-12-04T13:05:00Z

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 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

01_Android_Native.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

02_Android_Chrome.mp4

iOS: HybridApp

03_iOS_Native.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

04_iOS_Safari.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

05_MacOS_Chrome.mp4

Ollyws

LGTM.

neil-marcellini

Your testing video shows that the formula field can be manually edited after it has been removed from the workspace. But on OldDot, the formula field is never editable and it can only be deleted. I think we should have the same behavior. Formula fields can't be edited.

2025-12-04_15-19-25.mp4

lorretheboy · 2026-01-05T18:36:58Z

Sorry I missed this comment. Checking it...

lorretheboy · 2026-01-05T18:48:28Z

@neil-marcellini Updated the logic. Is it what you expect?

Screen.Recording.2026-01-06.at.01.46.30.mov

neil-marcellini

Thanks for the update, it looks pretty close to ready. There's one main thing we need to change.

neil-marcellini · 2026-01-06T23:00:36Z

src/pages/EditReportFieldPage.tsx

+                    isRequired={!isReportFieldDeletable}
+                    onSubmit={handleReportFieldChange}
+                    fieldList={policy?.fieldList}
+                    disabled={reportField.deletable}


It should always be disabled and never editable. You can't set the value of a formula field; it's read only. I do think it makes sense to show it as a disabled text field because that's what we do on OldDot.

neil-marcellini · 2026-01-06T23:02:23Z

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts

        return !reportField?.deletable;
    }

-    return reportField?.type === CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.FORMULA;


We should go back to what's one main here. The title field is the only formula field that you can manually set a value for.

lorretheboy · 2026-01-08T17:37:59Z

src/components/MoneyRequestReportView/MoneyRequestViewReportFields.tsx

                    ...field,
                    fieldValue,
-                    isFieldDisabled,
+                    isFieldDisabled: isFieldDisabled && !isDeletedFormulaField,


Since we keep the isReportFieldDisabled function as original, we should update this to make sure we don't disable the field in case it is deleted formula field

lorretheboy · 2026-01-08T17:38:54Z

@neil-marcellini I have updated the code based on your feedback, please check again. Thanks

fix: allow to delete formula after deleting it from settings

b05214a

melvin-bot bot assigned lorretheboy Nov 24, 2025

chore: main

bf2ba26

lorretheboy marked this pull request as ready for review November 25, 2025 11:49

lorretheboy requested review from a team as code owners November 25, 2025 11:49

melvin-bot bot requested a review from Ollyws November 25, 2025 11:49

melvin-bot bot requested review from trjExpensify and removed request for a team November 25, 2025 11:49

lorretheboy mentioned this pull request Nov 25, 2025

[$250] Expense - Unable to delete Formula report field from Report after it is deleted in settings #74823

Open

16 tasks

trjExpensify previously approved these changes Nov 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

Ollyws reviewed Nov 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/libs/ReportUtils.ts Show resolved Hide resolved

lorretheboy added 2 commits November 27, 2025 02:29

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/Expensify/App into fix/74823

a579ee9

fix: view issue

f5bd6d7

lorretheboy dismissed trjExpensify’s stale review via f5bd6d7 November 26, 2025 18:39

Ollyws approved these changes Dec 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from neil-marcellini December 4, 2025 13:06

neil-marcellini requested changes Dec 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

lorretheboy added 2 commits January 5, 2026 23:10

chore: merge main

751ec82

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/Expensify/App into fix/74823

c81c094

fix: logic

2e2c201

neil-marcellini requested changes Jan 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

lorretheboy added 4 commits January 8, 2026 23:49

Merge branch 'main' of https://github.com/Expensify/App into fix/74823

3288fa5

fix: comments

c1cb58e

fix: comments

a17bb8f

chore: update conditions

8842b11

lorretheboy commented Jan 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

Expense - Unable to delete Formula report field from Report after it is deleted in settings #75926

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Expense - Unable to delete Formula report field from Report after it is deleted in settings #75926

Conversation

lorretheboy commented Nov 24, 2025 • 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 Nov 24, 2025 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Nov 25, 2025

Uh oh!

trjExpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Ollyws commented Nov 26, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

lorretheboy commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

lorretheboy commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

Ollyws commented Dec 4, 2025

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

Ollyws left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

neil-marcellini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lorretheboy commented Jan 5, 2026

Uh oh!

lorretheboy commented Jan 5, 2026

Uh oh!

neil-marcellini left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

neil-marcellini Jan 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

neil-marcellini Jan 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lorretheboy Jan 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lorretheboy commented Jan 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

lorretheboy commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Nov 24, 2025 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

Ollyws commented Nov 26, 2025 •

edited

Loading