[No QA] Fix isActiveRoute flaky test by MonilBhavsar · Pull Request #74164 · Expensify/App

MonilBhavsar · 2025-11-04T07:47:22Z

Explanation of Change

We were unnecessarily rendering TestNavigationContainer 9 times that could cause SIGTERM. This PR attempts to fix it

Fixed Issues

$ #74081
PROPOSAL:

Tests

npm test -- tests/navigation/isActiveRouteTests.tsx

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

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
- MacOS: Desktop
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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
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

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2025-11-04T07:47:28Z

@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]

codecov · 2025-11-04T08:04:33Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

This PR refactors a navigation test from using a parameterized test.each approach to a single it test block that contains multiple assertions. The change consolidates test cases for the isActiveRoute function into one test case with multiple expect statements.

Key Changes

Removed the test import from @jest/globals (line 1)
Converted parameterized test.each structure to a single it test block
Added an additional test case for 'settings/preferences/'

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

Copilot · 2025-11-04T08:26:25Z

+        expect(Navigation.isActiveRoute('settings/profile' as Route)).toBe(true);
+        expect(Navigation.isActiveRoute('settings/profile/' as Route)).toBe(true);
+        expect(Navigation.isActiveRoute('settings/profile?param=1' as Route)).toBe(true);
+        expect(Navigation.isActiveRoute('settings/profile/display-name' as Route)).toBe(false);
+        expect(Navigation.isActiveRoute('settings/profile/display-name/' as Route)).toBe(false);
+        expect(Navigation.isActiveRoute('settings/preferences' as Route)).toBe(false);
+        expect(Navigation.isActiveRoute('settings/preferences/' as Route)).toBe(false);
+        expect(Navigation.isActiveRoute('report' as Route)).toBe(false);
+        expect(Navigation.isActiveRoute('report/123/' as Route)).toBe(false);
+        expect(Navigation.isActiveRoute('report/123' as Route)).toBe(false);


Consolidating multiple test cases into a single test block reduces test granularity and makes it harder to identify which specific route check fails. When one assertion fails, subsequent assertions won't run, and the test output won't clearly indicate which route caused the failure. Consider using test.each or separate test cases to maintain better test isolation and clearer failure reporting.

The error line would tell which assertion is failing, so it should be fine

lakchote · 2025-11-04T10:23:47Z

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
- MacOS: Desktop
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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

MacOS: Desktop

OSBotify · 2025-11-04T21:14:38Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/MonilBhavsar in version: 9.2.44-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2025-11-05T20:08:03Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.2.44-5 🚀

platform	result
🖥 desktop 🖥	success ✅
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌

Render navigation container once

bb1a4d5

MonilBhavsar requested a review from a team as a code owner November 4, 2025 07:47

melvin-bot Bot assigned MonilBhavsar Nov 4, 2025

melvin-bot Bot requested review from linhvovan29546 and removed request for a team November 4, 2025 07:47

MonilBhavsar removed the request for review from linhvovan29546 November 4, 2025 07:50

MonilBhavsar changed the title ~~Fix isActiveRoute flaky test~~ [No QA] Fix isActiveRoute flaky test Nov 4, 2025

Fix lint

8067d71

MonilBhavsar requested a review from Copilot November 4, 2025 08:20

Copilot AI reviewed Nov 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

lakchote approved these changes Nov 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

MonilBhavsar merged commit b03bbd6 into main Nov 4, 2025
30 of 34 checks passed

MonilBhavsar deleted the monil-fixIsActiveRouteTest branch November 4, 2025 10:40

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-11-04 #74235

Closed

56 tasks

melvin-bot Bot mentioned this pull request Nov 5, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-11-12] Investigate workflow job failing on main: test / test (job 2) #74081

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

[No QA] Fix isActiveRoute flaky test#74164

[No QA] Fix isActiveRoute flaky test#74164
MonilBhavsar merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
monil-fixIsActiveRouteTest

MonilBhavsar commented Nov 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Nov 4, 2025

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Nov 4, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Nov 4, 2025

Uh oh!

MonilBhavsar Nov 4, 2025

Uh oh!

lakchote commented Nov 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Nov 4, 2025

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Nov 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

MonilBhavsar commented Nov 4, 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!

melvin-bot Bot commented Nov 4, 2025

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Nov 4, 2025

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Key Changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Nov 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MonilBhavsar Nov 4, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lakchote commented Nov 4, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Nov 4, 2025

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Nov 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

MonilBhavsar commented Nov 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

lakchote commented Nov 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading