Hey, I noticed you changed src/languages/en.ts in a PR from a fork. For security reasons, translations are not generated automatically for PRs from forks.

If you want to automatically generate translations for other locales, an Expensify employee will have to:

1. Look at the code and make sure there are no malicious changes.
2. Run the Generate static translations GitHub workflow. If you have write access and the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Alternatively, if you are an external contributor, you can run the translation script locally with your own OpenAI API key. To learn more, try running:

npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --help

Typically, you'd want to translate only what you changed by running npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --compare-ref main

@DylanDylann 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]

Can I run the translation script myself?

Btw, when we apply a negated HAS filter with a Tag value, it will be applied as "Tag: No tag".

It's from this code. It causes weird buggy behavior with the Has filter component, as shown in the video above.

Is that expected?

🚧 @dubielzyk-expensify has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #93909.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-d5746a1607e-57a8e82-21a714aa9be6941a9a8919a860d2a71fc5cacdff/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-d5746a1-57a8e82-7c2e95c29b6978b3ea4fd4fbff344f6e1bf62777/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://93909.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

This is looking great already @bernhardoj. Let's make this text label (13px) not body (15px)

I'm not convinced we should use the is/is not in the chip itself:

I have to go and will have a noodle, but I think we might want an icon or do From: not Jon Dubby. But even that feels weird. I don't think it's crucial for it to be written fully out, but just be able to signal between is/isn't in some way, then when you open the filter you can see it more clearly there anyways

cc @Expensify/design @trjExpensify @JmillsExpensify

Let's make this text label (13px) not body (15px)

Done

I'm not convinced we should use the is/is not in the chip itself:

I have to go and will have a noodle, but I think we might want an icon or do `From: not Jon Dubby`. But even that feels weird. I don't think it's crucial for it to be written fully out, but just be able to signal between is/isn't in some way, then when you open the filter you can see it more clearly there anyways

cc @Expensify/design @trjExpensify @JmillsExpensify

I'm fine with what I'm seeing in the adhoc.

@bernhardoj Looks like we're still missing support for Status and Workspace in the adhoc. Those are mentioned in the OP. Let me know if I'm missing something!

Status and workspace are still having their BE PRs worked on: https://github.com/Expensify/Auth/pull/22241

@aimane-chnaif back to you

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 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 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 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.
• 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

A few issues found:

Bug 1:

1. Search type:expense category!=Travel
2. Click -Category: Travel filter pill
3. Click Apply without any change
4. Filter is gone <--- bug

Bug 2:

1. Search type:expense has:receipt has!=category
2. Console error shows (React duplicate-key warning) <--- bug
3. click Has: Receipt filter pill
4. doesn't have filter type is selected with Category <--- bug
5. Click Apply without any change
6. has:receipt Filter is gone <--- bug

For the 1st bug, it's the result of showing all negated filters, even without the negation/Filter type switch. But I think even though it doesn't have that switch, we can just show the selection for the negated value. So, any update to the filter will update the negated value.

@JS00001 @JmillsExpensify let me know if you disagree.

For the 2nd bug, I think both non-negated and negated filters shouldn't be applied at the same time in the first place. When the user writes the same filter with both non-negated and negated types, I think we should take the rightmost one.

For example, if we type
category:Advertising -category:Home

then the final category filter is categoryNot: [Home]

(I think the 2nd bug shouldn't block this PR if we want to go forward because we can apply both non-negated and negated filters already on prod)

UPDATE: I just checked on prod, and when we write 2 same filter keys, for example, category:Advertising category:Home, both are sent to the BE, even though we only show the Home one on the FE, but the BE will return no result. I think we should fix this at the query parsing level, so the parsed query won't contain duplicate keys (or should we keep how the parsing works today?).

@JS00001 @JmillsExpensify what do you guys think?

(also please check this one 😄)

So, any update to the filter will update the negated value

That makes sense to me.

For the 2nd bug, I think both non-negated and negated filters shouldn't be applied at the same time in the first place. When the user writes the same filter with both non-negated and negated types, I think we should take the rightmost one.

Also makes sense to me, since the right-most is the most recent.

I just checked on prod, and when we write 2 same filter keys, for example, category:Advertising category:Home, both are sent to the BE, even though we only show the Home one on the FE, but the BE will return no result. I think we should fix this at the query parsing level, so the parsed query won't contain duplicate keys (or should we keep how the parsing works today?).

Given that this is already on production, I'd handle this separately and not block this PR on it.

@aimane-chnaif just merged with main, please continue the review

@JmillsExpensify bump for this one please 😄

@bernhardoj Are all comments addressed?

Still need confirmation for this (cc: @JmillsExpensify @JS00001), but you can continue the review.

Please fix conflict

@bernhardoj

I think we should make them independent of each other. WDYT?

Can you explain this please?

@JS00001 I mean that, changing the has filter shouldn't change the tag filter.

When we apply -has:tag, then it should be translated to hasNot:[tag] instead of tag:[none].

@aimane-chnaif fixed

@bernhardoj if they yield the same results, I agree

It feels like we did it one way over the other because there may have been some edge cases. Does using -has:tag work in your testing?

Bug: mobile filter popup layout is broken

It feels like we did it one way over the other because there may have been some edge cases. Does using -has:tag work in your testing?

@JS00001 Yes, it works. When we type -has:tag, it's sent as it is to the BE, but on the FE, we convert the queryJSON to searchAdvancedFiltersForm onyx, and -has:tag query gets converted to tag:['none']. We use searchAdvancedFiltersForm to render the filters bar/chip (I think maybe we should start relying on queryJSON as the source of truth, but that's a different topic).

I checked the history of why we do that. It was first introduced in #91652. The issue is that when we send tag:none as a query to the BE, it won't return any results. So, they applied a workaround to convert tag:none to -has:tag. I believe it's a workaround because category works fine even though we send category:none to the BE. So, the plan for this is to fix it first on the BE and then revert #91652.

Bug: mobile filter popup layout is broken

@aimane-chnaif Fixed

@bernhardoj so are BE changes needed here?

Also, jest is failing