[Due for payment 2025-11-26] [Due for payment 2025-11-17] [CRN-QA] report field initial value set to formula referencing itself

[neil-marcellini]

Issue Reported by : Applause Internal Team

Action performed

1. Create a workspace and expense report on the workspace
2. Set the default report title to "Report field value {field:Test text}"
3. Create a text report field on the policy named "Test text" with the initial value set to "initial"
4. Update the initial value to "{field:Test text}"
5. Open the initial value page again
6. Delete the report field
7. Open the policy expense chat

Expected result

• Setting the initial value of a report field, or the value of a report field, to a text value which is a formula referencing the field itself, and therefore creating a circular reference, should result in an error and the new value should not be saved
  • Note: On Classic, setting the initial value of a report field to a valid formula makes the report field a "formula" type, and its value can not be manually changed on the report.
• If a report field initial value is a formula that references itself, and it is already saved in the database, because it is currently allowed on Expensify Classic, then the type of the returned report field should be changed to "text" so that it is not computed

The initial value page is not blank, and when opening the policy expense chat the app does not crash

Actual result

The initial value page is blank, and the app crashes when opening the policy expense chat

490105214-64e7dfec-1f75-472e-92ae-1bbab24580e6.mp4

OldDot behavior

2025-10-01_08-10-53.mp4

Backend code for identifying circular references

First circular references are checked for the whole formula, but on the frontend you could check passing only one "part" such as {field:someField}, and no parent fields.

string Formula::compute(SQLite& db, const JSON::Value& reportJSON, const UserDefinedFieldFormula* formula,
                        map<int64_t, UserCache>* userCacheMap, map<string, PolicyCache>* policyCacheMap, map<int64_t, ReportCache>* reportCacheMap, const JSON::Value& transactionJSON, const bool preventDeprecatedFormulas)
{
    SDEBUG("[Formula::compute] defaultValue: " << formula->getDefaultValue().value());
    const auto parts = parse(formula->getFormula());

    const int64_t reportID = reportJSON.getIntMemberWithDefault("reportID", 0);
    if (hasCircularReferences(db, reportID, parts, {})) {
        SINFO("Formula has circular references, omitting");
        return "";
    }


bool Formula::hasCircularReferences(SQLite& db, int64_t reportID, const vector<unique_ptr<FormulaPart>>& parts, const vector<string>& parentFields)
{
    // Prevent excessive recursion depth that could cause stack overflow
    if (parentFields.size() > MAX_CIRCULAR_REFERENCE_DEPTH) {
        SHMMM("Circular reference depth exceeds maximum allowed", {{"depth", to_string(parentFields.size())}, {"maxDepth", to_string(MAX_CIRCULAR_REFERENCE_DEPTH)}});

        // Assume circular reference to prevent further recursion
        return true;
    }

    for (const auto& part : parts) {
        if (part->getType() != FormulaPart::TYPE_FIELD) {
            continue;
        }

        auto* fieldPart = static_cast<FieldPart*>(part.get());
        const optional<unique_ptr<UserDefinedField>>& field = fieldPart->getField(db, reportID);
        if (!field.has_value()) {
            continue;
        }

        auto* formulaField = dynamic_cast<UserDefinedFieldFormula*>(field.value().get());
        if (!formulaField) {
            continue;
        }

        const string fieldID = formulaField->getID();
        if (find(parentFields.begin(), parentFields.end(), fieldID) != parentFields.end()) {
            return true;
        }

        vector<string> newParentFields = parentFields;
        newParentFields.push_back(fieldID);
        if (formulaField->hasCircularReferences(db, reportID, newParentFields)) {
            return true;
        }
    }
    return false;
}



optional<unique_ptr<UserDefinedField>> FieldPart::getField(SQLite& db, int64_t reportID)
{
    if (fieldPath.size() == 0) {
        return nullopt;
    }

    string name = fieldPath[0];
    auto fieldID = UserDefinedField::createFromDatabaseData<UserDefinedField>(JSON::Value({{"name", STrim(name)}, {"type", UserDefinedField::UDF_TYPE_TEXT}}))->getID();
    auto udfs = Report::getUserDefinedFields(db, reportID);

    for (auto& udf : udfs) {
        if (udf->getID() == fieldID) {
            return make_optional(move(udf));
        }
    }

    return nullopt;
}

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @sonialiap

[melvin-bot]

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

[lorretheboy]

🚨 Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2025-09-18 05:45:01 UTC.

Proposal

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

Report field formulas: Report name is not updated to “Report field value {field:Test text}” and app crash observed

What is the root cause of that problem?

1. App crash observed
   Backend return formula type for text type, however, we don't have formula type here. I believe this is BE bug

App/src/libs/WorkspaceReportFieldUtils.ts

Lines 14 to 22 in 5383559

	function getReportFieldTypeTranslationKey(reportFieldType: PolicyReportFieldType): TranslationPaths {
	const typeTranslationKeysStrategy: Record<string, TranslationPaths> = {
	[CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.TEXT]: 'workspace.reportFields.textType',
	[CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.DATE]: 'workspace.reportFields.dateType',
	[CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.LIST]: 'workspace.reportFields.dropdownType',
	};
	return typeTranslationKeysStrategy[reportFieldType];
	}

2. Report name is not updated
   We don't support custom field handler here
   

   App/src/libs/Formula.ts

   Lines 210 to 211 in f39ed5e

   	case FORMULA_PART_TYPES.FIELD:
   	value = computeFieldPart(part);

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

1. BE should return correct text type for this case

2. For the issue that Report name is not updated

We should update computeFieldPart to accept one more param for context

            case FORMULA_PART_TYPES.FIELD:
                value = computeFieldPart(part, context);
                value = value === '' ? part.definition : value;

App/src/libs/Formula.ts

Lines 210 to 211 in f39ed5e

	case FORMULA_PART_TYPES.FIELD:
	value = computeFieldPart(part);

Update computeFieldPart function to handle custom field

function computeFieldPart(part: FormulaPart, context: FormulaContext): string {
        const {report} = context;
        const [fieldName] = part.fieldPath;

        if (!fieldName || !report?.fieldList) {
            return part.definition;
        }

        const fieldEntry = Object.values(report.fieldList).find((field) => field?.name === fieldName);

        if (!fieldEntry) {
            return part.definition;
        }

        // Return the field's value, or its defaultValue if no value is set, or the original definition if neither exists
        const fieldValue = fieldEntry.value ?? fieldEntry.defaultValue ?? part.definition;

        return typeof fieldValue === 'string' ? fieldValue : String(fieldValue);
}

App/src/libs/Formula.ts

Lines 267 to 270 in f39ed5e

	function computeFieldPart(part: FormulaPart): string {
	// Field computation will be implemented later
	return part.definition;
	}

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

Can update FormulaTest.ts test to include new cases if needed

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Reminder: Please use plain English, be brief and avoid jargon. Feel free to use images, charts or pseudo-code if necessary. Do not post large multi-line diffs or write walls of text. Do not create PRs unless you have been hired for this job.

[mukhrr]

🚨 Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2025-09-18 01:57:45 UTC.

Proposal

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

After setting report field initial value to "{field:Test text}" app crashes

What is the root cause of that problem?

It's crashish as BE is sending type as "formula" when inital value is set to "{field:Test text}" even if type is "text"

Thus, this function is causing crash:

App/src/libs/WorkspaceReportFieldUtils.ts

Lines 14 to 22 in 925b811

	function getReportFieldTypeTranslationKey(reportFieldType: PolicyReportFieldType): TranslationPaths {
	const typeTranslationKeysStrategy: Record<string, TranslationPaths> = {
	[CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.TEXT]: 'workspace.reportFields.textType',
	[CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.DATE]: 'workspace.reportFields.dateType',
	[CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.LIST]: 'workspace.reportFields.dropdownType',
	};
	return typeTranslationKeysStrategy[reportFieldType];
	}

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

We should give fallback text type to getReportFieldTypeTranslationKey and getReportFieldAlternativeTextTranslationKey:

return typeTranslationKeysStrategy[reportFieldType] || typeTranslationKeysStrategy[CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.TEXT];

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

N/A

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

But I think still root cause is from backend.

[NJ-2020]

🚨 Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2025-09-18 10:30:22 UTC.

Proposal

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

Report field formulas: Report name is not updated to “Report field value {field:Test text}” and app crash observed

What is the root cause of that problem?

When we update the initial value field into {field:Test text}, the BE update the field type based on the provided initial value, int this case, the BE update from text into >> formula

But since we don't have formula keys here, and when we try to retrieve the based on the report field type, it will return undefined here since it doesn't exist which cause the translate localize to throw an error

App/src/pages/workspace/reports/WorkspaceReportsPage.tsx

Line 113 in 925b811

rightLabel: Str.recapitalize(translate(getReportFieldTypeTranslationKey(reportField.type))),

App/src/libs/WorkspaceReportFieldUtils.ts

Lines 14 to 22 in 925b811

	function getReportFieldTypeTranslationKey(reportFieldType: PolicyReportFieldType): TranslationPaths {
	const typeTranslationKeysStrategy: Record<string, TranslationPaths> = {
	[CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.TEXT]: 'workspace.reportFields.textType',
	[CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.DATE]: 'workspace.reportFields.dateType',
	[CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.LIST]: 'workspace.reportFields.dropdownType',
	};
	return typeTranslationKeysStrategy[reportFieldType];
	}

App/src/libs/Localize/index.ts

Line 138 in 925b811

throw new Error(`${path} was not found in the ${locale} locale`);

So instead of passing correct value like this:

Str.recapitalize(translate('Text' || 'Date' || 'List'))

we pass undefined which cause an error/crash

Str.recapitalize(translate(undefined)) // << formula is not exists

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

Based right here, we need to add new validation check here whether if the report field initial value is containing formula pattern or not

Initial value check validation

function WorkspaceCreateReportFieldsPage({
    policy,
    route: {
        params: {policyID},
    },
}: CreateReportFieldsPageProps) {
    ...
    const validateForm = useCallback(
        (values: FormOnyxValues<typeof ONYXKEYS.FORMS.WORKSPACE_REPORT_FIELDS_FORM>): FormInputErrors<typeof ONYXKEYS.FORMS.WORKSPACE_REPORT_FIELDS_FORM> => {
            const {name, type, initialValue: formInitialValue} = values;
            const errors: FormInputErrors<typeof ONYXKEYS.FORMS.WORKSPACE_REPORT_FIELDS_FORM> = {};

            ...

            // Include formula value check here
            if (type === CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.TEXT && containsFormulaPattern(formInitialValue)) {
                errors[INPUT_IDS.INITIAL_VALUE] = translate('workspace.reportFields.formulaError');
            }

            return errors;
        },
        [availableListValuesLength, policy?.fieldList, translate],
    );
    ...
}

Updating report field initial value

function ReportFieldsInitialValuePage({
    policy,
    route: {
        params: {policyID, reportFieldID},
    },
}: ReportFieldsInitialValuePageProps) {
    ...
    const validateForm = useCallback(
        (values: FormOnyxValues<typeof ONYXKEYS.FORMS.WORKSPACE_REPORT_FIELDS_FORM>): FormInputErrors<typeof ONYXKEYS.FORMS.WORKSPACE_REPORT_FIELDS_FORM> => {
            const {initialValue: formInitialValue} = values;
            const errors: FormInputErrors<typeof ONYXKEYS.FORMS.WORKSPACE_REPORT_FIELDS_FORM> = {};

            if (reportField?.type === CONST.REPORT_FIELD_TYPES.TEXT && containsFormulaPattern(formInitialValue)) {
                errors[INPUT_IDS.INITIAL_VALUE] = translate('workspace.reportFields.formulaError');
            }

Updating report field value inside expense report

function EditReportFieldTextPage({fieldName, onSubmit, fieldValue, isRequired, fieldKey}: EditReportFieldTextPageProps) {
    ...

    const validate = useCallback(
        (values: FormOnyxValues<typeof ONYXKEYS.FORMS.REPORT_FIELDS_EDIT_FORM>) => {
            const errors: FormInputErrors<typeof ONYXKEYS.FORMS.REPORT_FIELDS_EDIT_FORM> = {};
            const inputValue = values[fieldKey].trim();
            if (isRequired && inputValue === '') {
                errors[fieldKey] = translate('common.error.fieldRequired');
            }

            // Formula value validation check
            if (containsFormulaPattern(inputValue)) {
                errors[fieldKey] = translate('workspace.reportFields.formulaError');
            }

            return errors;
        },
        [fieldKey, isRequired, translate],
    );

Test branch

Result

Screen.Recording.2025-09-29.at.09.53.14.mp4

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

N/A

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

N/A

[NJ-2020]

Note: I'm unsure if we should update the expense report name optimistically when updating the report field

10. Set the report field to “updated”
11. Verify the report name is updated to “Report field value updated”

It seems we're specifically addressing the {field: Test text} report name update bug error/crash rather than also updating the expense name optimistically. Also, I can't preview the attached video. Thanks

[DylanDylann]

Testing account configured for "Custom report formula" by running the snippets

Does anyone know how to enable this configuration?

[NJ-2020]

@DylanDylann Here is the configuration docs

Source: #68803

[DylanDylann]

@NJ-2020 Thanks for your reference

[DylanDylann]

@neil-marcellini could you upload the video on the OP again? It will help us determine the bug correctly

[NJ-2020]

Proposal updated

• Added new RCA/solution for this bug
• Update result video