fix: Preserve all matching selection after deselecting an expense by emkhalid · Pull Request #95902 · Expensify/App

emkhalid · 2026-07-11T18:45:42Z

Explanation of Change

This PR preserves the “all matching items” selection when individual expenses are unchecked.

It:

Tracks unchecked expenses as explicit exclusions while keeping all-matching selection active.
Automatically selects newly loaded matching expenses while preserving exclusions.
Shows the total matching count minus excluded expenses.
Keeps the count and selection stable while loading additional pages or opening and closing expenses.
Calculates totals on demand without advancing pagination or recalculating totals for every page.
Passes excluded transaction IDs to supported basic/current-view CSV exports.

Fixed Issues

$ #94143
PROPOSAL: #94143 (comment)

Tests

Precondition: Use an account with more than 50 expenses.

Select all matching expenses and Exclude one expense
1. Navigate to Spend > Expenses.
2. Open the bulk-selection menu and choose Select all.
3. Verify the button displays “All matching items selected”.
4. After selecting all matching expenses, uncheck one expense.
5. Verify only that expense becomes unchecked.
6. Verify the button displays the total matching count minus one.
7. Verify all other matching expenses remain selected.
Preserve selection during pagination
1. Exclude one expense after selecting all matching expenses.
2. Scroll to the bottom and load the next page.
3. Verify newly loaded expenses are automatically checked.
4. Verify the excluded expense remains unchecked.
5. Verify the selected count does not increase when the next page loads.
Avoid recalculating totals during pagination
1. Select all matching expenses and wait for the total to load.
2. Scroll to load another page.
3. Verify the pagination Search request uses shouldCalculateTotals: false.
4. Verify the request loads only the next page.
Recheck an excluded expense
1. Select all matching expenses.
2. Uncheck one expense.
3. Recheck the same expense.
4. Verify it is selected again.
5. Verify the button returns to “All matching items selected” when no exclusions remain.
Exclude multiple expenses
1. Select all matching expenses.
2. Uncheck multiple expenses across loaded pages.
3. Verify every unchecked expense remains excluded.
4. Verify the selected count decreases once for each excluded expense.
5. Recheck the expenses and verify the count increases correctly.
Verify grouped and expense-report selection
1. Open a grouped expense or expense-report search.
2. Select all matching items.
3. Exclude one selection unit.
4. Verify the excluded row is displayed as unchecked.
5. Verify the parent group/report is not displayed as fully selected when one of its expenses is excluded.
6. Verify newly loaded matching rows remain selected.
Verify the selection footer
1. Select all matching expenses and wait for the count and total.
2. Exclude one expense.
3. Verify the footer count subtracts the excluded expense.
4. Verify the footer total subtracts the excluded expense amount.
5. Recheck the expense and verify its count and amount are restored.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

Same as Tests

// 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

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Select all matching expenses and Exclude one expense

android-native-Select.all.matching.expenses.and.Exclude.one.expense.mov

Preserve selection during pagination

android-native-Preserve.selection.during.pagination.mp4

Avoid recalculating totals during pagination

Not applicable.

Recheck an excluded expense

android-native-Recheck.an.excluded.expense.mov

Exclude multiple expenses

android-native-Exclude.multiple.expenses.mov

Verify grouped and expense-report selection

android-native-Verify.grouped.and.expense-report.selection.mp4

Verify the selection footer

andoir-native-Verify.the.selection.footer.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Select all matching expenses and Exclude one expense

android-web-Select.all.matching.expenses.and.Exclude.one.expense.mov

Preserve selection during pagination

android-web-Preserve.selection.during.pagination.mp4

Avoid recalculating totals during pagination

Not applicable.

Recheck an excluded expense

android-web-Recheck.an.excluded.expense.mov

Exclude multiple expenses

android-web-Exclude.multiple.expenses.mov

Verify grouped and expense-report selection

android-web-Verify.grouped.and.expense-report.selection.mp4

Verify the selection footer

andoir-web-Verify.the.selection.footer.mov

iOS: Native

Select all matching expenses and Exclude one expense

ios-native-Select.all.matching.expenses.and.Exclude.one.expense.mov

Preserve selection during pagination

ios-native-Preserve.selection.during.pagination.mp4

Avoid recalculating totals during pagination

Not applicable.

Recheck an excluded expense

ios-native-Recheck.an.excluded.expense.mov

Exclude multiple expenses

ios-native-Exclude.multiple.expenses.mov

Verify grouped and expense-report selection

ios-native-Verify.grouped.and.expense-report.selection.mov

Verify the selection footer

ios-native-Verify.the.selection.footer.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Select all matching expenses and Exclude one expense

ios-web-Select.all.matching.expenses.and.Exclude.one.expense.mov

Preserve selection during pagination

ios-web-Preserve.selection.during.pagination.mp4

Avoid recalculating totals during pagination

Not applicable.

Recheck an excluded expense

ios-web-Recheck.an.excluded.expense.mov

Exclude multiple expenses

ios-web-Exclude.multiple.expenses.mov

Verify grouped and expense-report selection

ios-web-Verify.grouped.and.expense-report.selection.mov

Verify the selection footer

ios-web-Verify.the.selection.footer.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Select all matching expenses and Exclude one expense

Select.all.matching.expenses.and.Exclude.one.expense.mov

Preserve selection during pagination

Preserve.selection.during.pagination.mov

Avoid recalculating totals during pagination

Avoid.recalculating.totals.during.pagination.mp4

Recheck an excluded expense

Recheck.an.excluded.expense.mov

Exclude multiple expenses

Exclude.multiple.expenses.mov

Verify grouped and expense-report selection

Verify.grouped.and.expense-report.selection.webm

Verify the selection footer

Verify.the.selection.footer.mov

codecov · 2026-07-11T18:49:42Z

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/components/Search/SearchContextDefinitions.ts	`51.85% <ø> (ø)`
src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts	`54.05% <100.00%> (+0.19%)`	⬆️
src/hooks/useSearchShouldCalculateTotals.ts	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/components/Search/SearchBulkActionsButton.tsx	`91.66% <88.23%> (+90.21%)`	⬆️
...h/SearchList/ListItem/TransactionGroupListItem.tsx	`74.19% <33.33%> (-0.49%)`	⬇️
...s/Search/SearchPageHeader/SearchActionsBarWide.tsx	`11.11% <0.00%> (-1.39%)`	⬇️
src/libs/actions/Search.ts	`44.78% <70.00%> (+3.58%)`	⬆️
src/components/Search/SearchSelectionFooter.tsx	`88.23% <80.00%> (+46.56%)`	⬆️
src/components/Search/SearchSelectionProvider.tsx	`68.75% <81.81%> (+16.89%)`	⬆️
...c/components/Search/SearchWriteActionsProvider.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 1 more
... and 169 files with indirect coverage changes

melvin-bot · 2026-07-12T19:55:37Z

@mkhutornyi 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]

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: dc68c95a59

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-14T16:14:56Z

@codex review

MelvinBot · 2026-07-14T16:20:05Z

🤖 Reviewed the exclusion-tracking approach. The core design — keeping areAllMatchingItemsSelected active and recording unchecked rows as excludedTransactions — is sound, the reconciliation in applySelection (add removed keys, drop re-added keys) reads correctly, and the lifecycle resets (clear / turn-off / re-select-all all wipe exclusions) look complete. Test coverage is good. A few things worth confirming before merge:

1. Count vs. total may disagree for partially-excluded expense reports — worth confirming
In expense-report view the excluded count collapses to unique reportIDs (SearchSelectionFooter.tsx:66, same in SearchBulkActionsButton.tsx:133), but the total subtracts every excluded transaction's amount (SearchSelectionFooter.tsx:72). If a report can ever be partially excluded (some of its transactions unchecked, not all), the count would drop by a whole report while the total only drops by those transactions. This is fine as long as unchecking in expense-report view is always report-granular — please confirm that's guaranteed.

2. Pagination offset reset is the highest-risk change — please QA carefully
index.tsx:186-193 adds a setTimeout(() => setOffset(...)) that can move offset backward (Math.min(offset, serverOffset)) when the all-matching count is missing, plus the new guard clauses around index.tsx:416. This is the most intricate part of the PR. Suggest an explicit test: load several pages, then hit Select all, and verify the list doesn't jump/scroll-reset and that no duplicate/extra Search request fires.

3. Negative-amount (refund/credit) rows — low priority
getTransactionTotal always adds Math.abs(amount), so excluding a refund still reduces the remaining total. This mirrors the pre-existing client-total convention, so it's likely intentional — just confirm the server total uses the same absolute-value convention so the subtraction at SearchSelectionFooter.tsx:72 stays correct.

4. Confirm the backend honors excludedTransactionIDList
The new param is now sent on the CSV export command. Make sure the export backend actually reads and filters on it — otherwise excluded rows will still appear in the downloaded CSV even though the UI count/total exclude them.

None of these are blockers on their own, but 1 and 2 are the ones I'd verify with a manual pass before merging.

MelvinBot · 2026-07-14T16:23:56Z

🤖 Code-quality pass (separate from the correctness notes above — this is about readability/maintainability, not bugs). The PR is generally clean: types are documented, the deps-omission comments were kept in sync, and the new unit tests are well-structured. A few things worth tightening:

1. Duplicated — and subtly divergent — selection-count logic (worth consolidating)
The "count selection units, expanding groups and de-duping expense-report rows" logic now exists twice with different implementations:

SearchBulkActionsButton.tsx:107 (getItemsCount) — group check via key.startsWith(CONST.SEARCH.GROUP_PREFIX), reads searchData.
SearchSelectionFooter.tsx:44 (getTransactionCount) — group check via isGroupEntry, reads currentSearchResults.data, and additionally skips VIEW-action report rows.

Two counters that are supposed to agree on the same selection can drift apart. Extracting one shared helper (e.g. in SearchUIUtils) would remove the duplication and guarantee the button and footer report the same number.

2. Pagination/totals orchestration in index.tsx is hard to follow
The new flow spreads across the render body and two effects: searchRequestOffset at index.tsx:186 plus the didJustFinishAllMatchingTotalsRequest / didEnableAllMatchingTotalsWithExistingCount guard booleans around index.tsx:416. This is a lot of stateful branching in an already-large component. Pulling it into a dedicated hook (e.g. useAllMatchingTotalsPagination) with a clear contract would make it far easier to reason about and unit-test in isolation.

3. setTimeout(() => setOffset(...), 0) needs a "why" comment
index.tsx:192 defers a state update via a zero-delay timeout. That's an unusual pattern and reads as a workaround — a one-line comment explaining what it's avoiding (render-phase set-state / effect ordering) would save the next reader a lot of guessing.

4. Redundant per-consumer default for excludedTransactions
excludedTransactions = getEmptyObject<SelectedTransactions>() is repeated in ~6 consumers (e.g. SearchBulkActionsButton.tsx:52), but the context already defaults it to {} in SearchContextDefinitions. The fallbacks are dead defensiveness — dropping them (or relying solely on the context default) removes the repetition.

5. Minor: naming drift
excludedTransactionIDs, excludedTransactionIDList, and excludedTransactionsKeys all appear for closely related things. Not worth churning on its own, but aligning them would reduce friction.

Items 1 and 2 are the ones with real maintenance value; the rest are polish.

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: f0b00c16ff

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

mkhutornyi

Please address AI review comments above

MelvinBot · 2026-07-14T16:29:41Z

🤖 Regression hunt on this diff. Most of the change is correctly gated behind the new all-matching/exclusion state, so ordinary selection and pagination are largely untouched. The risks below are the spots where existing behavior changes:

R1 — Group / expense-report rows now derive their checked state purely from child isSelected, dropping the previous fallback (highest risk)
ExpenseReportListItem.tsx:108 and TransactionGroupListItem.tsx:226 both dropped the || liveRowSelected fallback for non-empty rows. A parent row is now checked only when every one of its currently-loaded children has isSelected === true (isSelectAllChecked / areAllReportTransactionsSelected). Previously the row was also checked whenever the row itself was covered by select-all.

Normal per-item selection is fine — for non-empty groups/reports selection is keyed by child transaction ID, so liveRowSelected(rowKey) was already effectively dead there (see the code comment). The risk is specifically Select all matching in grouped and expense-report views: if reconcile hasn't yet marked every child isSelected (timing, or a group whose child rows aren't all loaded/reconciled), the parent row can render unchecked or indeterminate even with zero exclusions.
→ Verify: Select all in a grouped view (by category/merchant) and in expense-report view → every group/report shows fully checked immediately, not indeterminate.

R2 — useSearchShouldCalculateTotals no longer forces totals for all-matching after pagination
useSearchShouldCalculateTotals.ts:25 changed the all-matching branch from return true to return enabled. This is the intended optimization, but it's a semantics change to a shared hook: previously all-matching always requested server totals regardless of offset.
→ Verify count/total still populate correctly when the user loads several pages before hitting Select all (the case the old return true specifically protected).

R3 — Pagination offset can be pushed backward under all-matching
index.tsx:186-193 adds a setTimeout(() => setOffset(Math.min(offset, serverOffset))) when the all-matching count is missing, plus early-return guards near index.tsx:416. Gated behind all-matching, so plain pagination is unaffected, but within all-matching this can reposition the list / re-fire a request. → QA: paginate deep, then Select all, and watch for a scroll jump or duplicate Search request.

R4 — SearchActionsBarWide broadened its subscription
SearchActionsBarWide.tsx:29 swapped the narrow useSelectionCounts() read for the full useSearchSelectionContext(), so it now re-renders on any selection-context change (the rest of this module deliberately uses narrow subscriptions). Minor perf regression. useSelectionCounts is still exported — worth confirming the narrow-layout bulk bar uses the same hasSelectedTransactions gate so wide and narrow don't diverge for all-matching.

R1 is the one I'd verify first, since it touches the existing select-all display and isn't behind the exclusion flag.

MelvinBot · 2026-07-14T16:34:42Z

🤖 Regression scan of PR #95902. These are behaviors that worked before and could break — none are confirmed at runtime (logic-derived), so I've ranked by likelihood and flagged what to test.

1. Group/report header checkbox can show unchecked under "Select all matching" (medium)
The header selected-state no longer trusts the global all-matching flag — it now requires every child transaction's isSelected to be populated:

TransactionGroupListItem.tsx:226 — isSelectAllChecked || (transactionsWithoutPendingDelete.length === 0 && liveRowSelected)
ExpenseReportListItem.tsx:108 — transactionsWithoutPendingDelete.length > 0 ? areAllReportTransactionsSelected : liveRowSelected

Previously both fell back to liveRowSelected, which is true for every row while all-matching is active. Now, immediately after tapping Select all (before useReconcileSelectionWithData populates each child's isSelected), or for a group whose children aren't loaded/reconciled, isSelectAllChecked/areAllReportTransactionsSelected is false → the header renders unchecked or indeterminate even though the row is fully covered by the selection. Test: grouped + expense-report views — tap Select all and watch for headers that flash (or stay) unchecked, and scroll new groups into view.

2. Pagination offset can be pulled backward (medium)
index.tsx:186-194 schedules setOffset(Math.min(offset, serverOffset)) whenever the all-matching count is missing. If local offset is ahead of the server's last-responded offset when Select all fires, this rewrites pagination state backward. The three guard clauses added around index.tsx:416 suggest request-loop edge cases were already hit here. Test: load several pages, then Select all (on an ad-hoc query whose count wasn't precomputed), and verify the list doesn't shrink/scroll-jump and no duplicate Search requests fire.

3. Count/total no longer refreshed while paginating under all-matching (low)
useSearchShouldCalculateTotals.ts:25 changed all-matching from always-true to return enabled, so pagination requests (offset > 0, count present) skip totals. This is the intended perf win, but the displayed count/total is now fetched once and reused — if underlying data changes mid-session it can go stale. Low impact; noting for awareness.

4. Bulk-actions bar stays visible when all loaded rows are excluded (low)
SearchActionsBarWide.tsx:29 now gates on hasSelectedTransactions, which is true whenever areAllMatchingItemsSelected is set — even if the user unchecks every currently-loaded row. The bar (and its count) will still render. Likely acceptable since "all matching" is conceptually still on, but confirm the displayed count/label reads sensibly in that state.

Item 1 is the one I'd verify first — it touches the most visible everyday flow (Select all in grouped/report views).

emkhalid · 2026-07-17T12:28:04Z

@mkhutornyi I found an additional issue while testing this PR:

Expenses: The selected count works correctly.
Reports: There are 58 report rows containing 320 expenses. After selecting all reports and unchecking one, the button shows 319 selected instead of 57 selected.

The backend returns search.count: 320 for the expense-report search, so the frontend does not know the total number of report rows before all pages are loaded.

Should we address this in the current PR? It appears the backend may need to return the total report count, possibly as a separate field.

staging.mp4

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-17T12:59:33Z

The original scope is Spend > Expenses tab.
If that bug happens in production, let's fix this separately.

emkhalid · 2026-07-17T17:39:52Z

🤖 Reviewed the exclusion-tracking approach. The core design — keeping areAllMatchingItemsSelected active and recording unchecked rows as excludedTransactions — is sound, the reconciliation in applySelection (add removed keys, drop re-added keys) reads correctly, and the lifecycle resets (clear / turn-off / re-select-all all wipe exclusions) look complete. Test coverage is good. A few things worth confirming before merge:

1. Count vs. total may disagree for partially-excluded expense reports — worth confirming In expense-report view the excluded count collapses to unique reportIDs (SearchSelectionFooter.tsx:66, same in SearchBulkActionsButton.tsx:133), but the total subtracts every excluded transaction's amount (SearchSelectionFooter.tsx:72). If a report can ever be partially excluded (some of its transactions unchecked, not all), the count would drop by a whole report while the total only drops by those transactions. This is fine as long as unchecking in expense-report view is always report-granular — please confirm that's guaranteed.

2. Pagination offset reset is the highest-risk change — please QA carefully index.tsx:186-193 adds a setTimeout(() => setOffset(...)) that can move offset backward (Math.min(offset, serverOffset)) when the all-matching count is missing, plus the new guard clauses around index.tsx:416. This is the most intricate part of the PR. Suggest an explicit test: load several pages, then hit Select all, and verify the list doesn't jump/scroll-reset and that no duplicate/extra Search request fires.

3. Negative-amount (refund/credit) rows — low priority getTransactionTotal always adds Math.abs(amount), so excluding a refund still reduces the remaining total. This mirrors the pre-existing client-total convention, so it's likely intentional — just confirm the server total uses the same absolute-value convention so the subtraction at SearchSelectionFooter.tsx:72 stays correct.

4. Confirm the backend honors excludedTransactionIDList The new param is now sent on the CSV export command. Make sure the export backend actually reads and filters on it — otherwise excluded rows will still appear in the downloaded CSV even though the UI count/total exclude them.

None of these are blockers on their own, but 1 and 2 are the ones I'd verify with a manual pass before merging.

I verified all four points and found no regression within this PR’s scope:

Expense-report count/total: Report selection is all-or-nothing. Unchecking one report excluded all its transactions, reduced the report count by one, and subtracted the correct total. The separate Reports counter issue is pre-existing and out of scope.
Pagination: After loading multiple pages and selecting all, only one totals request was sent. The list did not jump or lose rows, and later pagination requests used shouldCalculateTotals: false.
Refunds/credits: The backend and frontend used consistent signed totals. Excluding a refund correctly increased the remaining spend total.
CSV export: The frontend sent the exact excluded transaction IDs, and the generated CSV omitted those expenses while retaining the other selected expenses.

No changes are required for these points.

emkhalid · 2026-07-17T18:56:05Z

🤖 Code-quality pass (separate from the correctness notes above — this is about readability/maintainability, not bugs). The PR is generally clean: types are documented, the deps-omission comments were kept in sync, and the new unit tests are well-structured. A few things worth tightening:

1. Duplicated — and subtly divergent — selection-count logic (worth consolidating) The "count selection units, expanding groups and de-duping expense-report rows" logic now exists twice with different implementations:

SearchBulkActionsButton.tsx:107 (getItemsCount) — group check via key.startsWith(CONST.SEARCH.GROUP_PREFIX), reads searchData.

SearchSelectionFooter.tsx:44 (getTransactionCount) — group check via isGroupEntry, reads currentSearchResults.data, and additionally skips VIEW-action report rows.

Two counters that are supposed to agree on the same selection can drift apart. Extracting one shared helper (e.g. in SearchUIUtils) would remove the duplication and guarantee the button and footer report the same number.

2. Pagination/totals orchestration in index.tsx is hard to follow The new flow spreads across the render body and two effects: searchRequestOffset at index.tsx:186 plus the didJustFinishAllMatchingTotalsRequest / didEnableAllMatchingTotalsWithExistingCount guard booleans around index.tsx:416. This is a lot of stateful branching in an already-large component. Pulling it into a dedicated hook (e.g. useAllMatchingTotalsPagination) with a clear contract would make it far easier to reason about and unit-test in isolation.

3. setTimeout(() => setOffset(...), 0) needs a "why" comment index.tsx:192 defers a state update via a zero-delay timeout. That's an unusual pattern and reads as a workaround — a one-line comment explaining what it's avoiding (render-phase set-state / effect ordering) would save the next reader a lot of guessing.

4. Redundant per-consumer default for excludedTransactions excludedTransactions = getEmptyObject<SelectedTransactions>() is repeated in ~6 consumers (e.g. SearchBulkActionsButton.tsx:52), but the context already defaults it to {} in SearchContextDefinitions. The fallbacks are dead defensiveness — dropping them (or relying solely on the context default) removes the repetition.

5. Minor: naming drift excludedTransactionIDs, excludedTransactionIDList, and excludedTransactionsKeys all appear for closely related things. Not worth churning on its own, but aligning them would reduce friction.

Items 1 and 2 are the ones with real maintenance value; the rest are polish.

Addressed the safe, in-scope cleanup:

Added a comment explaining why the offset update is deferred with setTimeout.

I did not change the other suggestions:

The button/footer count consolidation and pagination-hook extraction are broader refactors outside this issue’s scope.
The empty defaults are harmless defensive fallbacks.
The different exclusion names represent different data shapes and the API parameter name must match the backend contract.

No functionality was changed.

emkhalid · 2026-07-19T08:14:07Z

🤖 Regression hunt on this diff. Most of the change is correctly gated behind the new all-matching/exclusion state, so ordinary selection and pagination are largely untouched. The risks below are the spots where existing behavior changes:

R1 — Group / expense-report rows now derive their checked state purely from child isSelected, dropping the previous fallback (highest risk) ExpenseReportListItem.tsx:108 and TransactionGroupListItem.tsx:226 both dropped the || liveRowSelected fallback for non-empty rows. A parent row is now checked only when every one of its currently-loaded children has isSelected === true (isSelectAllChecked / areAllReportTransactionsSelected). Previously the row was also checked whenever the row itself was covered by select-all.

Normal per-item selection is fine — for non-empty groups/reports selection is keyed by child transaction ID, so liveRowSelected(rowKey) was already effectively dead there (see the code comment). The risk is specifically Select all matching in grouped and expense-report views: if reconcile hasn't yet marked every child isSelected (timing, or a group whose child rows aren't all loaded/reconciled), the parent row can render unchecked or indeterminate even with zero exclusions. → Verify: Select all in a grouped view (by category/merchant) and in expense-report view → every group/report shows fully checked immediately, not indeterminate.

R2 — useSearchShouldCalculateTotals no longer forces totals for all-matching after pagination useSearchShouldCalculateTotals.ts:25 changed the all-matching branch from return true to return enabled. This is the intended optimization, but it's a semantics change to a shared hook: previously all-matching always requested server totals regardless of offset. → Verify count/total still populate correctly when the user loads several pages before hitting Select all (the case the old return true specifically protected).

R3 — Pagination offset can be pushed backward under all-matching index.tsx:186-193 adds a setTimeout(() => setOffset(Math.min(offset, serverOffset))) when the all-matching count is missing, plus early-return guards near index.tsx:416. Gated behind all-matching, so plain pagination is unaffected, but within all-matching this can reposition the list / re-fire a request. → QA: paginate deep, then Select all, and watch for a scroll jump or duplicate Search request.

R4 — SearchActionsBarWide broadened its subscription SearchActionsBarWide.tsx:29 swapped the narrow useSelectionCounts() read for the full useSearchSelectionContext(), so it now re-renders on any selection-context change (the rest of this module deliberately uses narrow subscriptions). Minor perf regression. useSelectionCounts is still exported — worth confirming the narrow-layout bulk bar uses the same hasSelectedTransactions gate so wide and narrow don't diverge for all-matching.

R1 is the one I'd verify first, since it touches the existing select-all display and isn't behind the exclusion flag.

Verified all four concerns:

Fixed the narrow-screen unloaded-group checkbox flicker.
Confirmed totals load after pagination and fixed the Slow 3G race that dropped the totals request.
Confirmed pagination causes no scroll jump, missing rows, or duplicate requests.
Confirmed the wide bulk-actions subscription does not introduce a meaningful regression.

No broader pagination, totals, or context refactor was made.

emkhalid · 2026-07-19T09:03:22Z

🤖 Regression scan of PR #95902. These are behaviors that worked before and could break — none are confirmed at runtime (logic-derived), so I've ranked by likelihood and flagged what to test.

1. Group/report header checkbox can show unchecked under "Select all matching" (medium) The header selected-state no longer trusts the global all-matching flag — it now requires every child transaction's isSelected to be populated:

TransactionGroupListItem.tsx:226 — isSelectAllChecked || (transactionsWithoutPendingDelete.length === 0 && liveRowSelected)

ExpenseReportListItem.tsx:108 — transactionsWithoutPendingDelete.length > 0 ? areAllReportTransactionsSelected : liveRowSelected

Previously both fell back to liveRowSelected, which is true for every row while all-matching is active. Now, immediately after tapping Select all (before useReconcileSelectionWithData populates each child's isSelected), or for a group whose children aren't loaded/reconciled, isSelectAllChecked/areAllReportTransactionsSelected is false → the header renders unchecked or indeterminate even though the row is fully covered by the selection. Test: grouped + expense-report views — tap Select all and watch for headers that flash (or stay) unchecked, and scroll new groups into view.

2. Pagination offset can be pulled backward (medium) index.tsx:186-194 schedules setOffset(Math.min(offset, serverOffset)) whenever the all-matching count is missing. If local offset is ahead of the server's last-responded offset when Select all fires, this rewrites pagination state backward. The three guard clauses added around index.tsx:416 suggest request-loop edge cases were already hit here. Test: load several pages, then Select all (on an ad-hoc query whose count wasn't precomputed), and verify the list doesn't shrink/scroll-jump and no duplicate Search requests fire.

3. Count/total no longer refreshed while paginating under all-matching (low) useSearchShouldCalculateTotals.ts:25 changed all-matching from always-true to return enabled, so pagination requests (offset > 0, count present) skip totals. This is the intended perf win, but the displayed count/total is now fetched once and reused — if underlying data changes mid-session it can go stale. Low impact; noting for awareness.

4. Bulk-actions bar stays visible when all loaded rows are excluded (low) SearchActionsBarWide.tsx:29 now gates on hasSelectedTransactions, which is true whenever areAllMatchingItemsSelected is set — even if the user unchecks every currently-loaded row. The bar (and its count) will still render. Likely acceptable since "all matching" is conceptually still on, but confirm the displayed count/label reads sensibly in that state.

Item 1 is the one I'd verify first — it touches the most visible everyday flow (Select all in grouped/report views).

Reviewed all four concerns:

The grouped-row flicker was valid and fixed.
Pagination/offset testing exposed a totals-request race, which was fixed.
Potentially stale totals after external data changes are outside this issue’s scope.
Keeping the bulk bar visible while all-matching remains active is expected behavior.

No further changes are needed.

emkhalid · 2026-07-19T10:10:46Z

@mkhutornyi thanks for the review, I addressed your comments please review again.

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T11:29:49Z

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 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
- 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
- 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 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

Android: HybridApp

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

mkhutornyi

Not bugs but left some questions to clarify

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T15:18:51Z

@@ -1023,6 +1044,7 @@ function search({
            })
            .finally(() => {
                inFlightSearchRequests.delete(dedupeKey);
+                return inFlightRequestState.pendingTotalsRequest?.();


What does this change fix?

This fixes a Slow 3G race. For example, if pagination with shouldCalculateTotals: false is still running when the user selects all, the new request with shouldCalculateTotals: true was treated as a duplicate and dropped. This queues that totals request and runs it after pagination finishes, so the correct count and footer load.

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T15:20:20Z

+        // so later pagination requests can avoid recalculating totals.
        if (areAllMatchingItemsSelected) {
-            return true;
+            return enabled;


What's this for?

This prevents totals from being recalculated on every page after Select all.

enabled is true when the count is missing, so selecting all still sends shouldCalculateTotals: true. Once the count is available, later pagination uses shouldCalculateTotals: false, keeping those requests lightweight.

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T15:22:02Z


            if (areAllMatchingItemsSelected) {
-                if (selectedTransactionsKeys.length === 0 || !hash) {
+                if (!hash) {


Why was this condition removed?

All-matching selection does not require loaded transaction IDs. For example, if the user excludes every loaded row, selectedTransactionsKeys is empty but off-screen matching expenses are still selected.

The export uses the search query plus excludedTransactionIDList, so only the search hash is required here.

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T15:23:15Z

                        continue;
                    }
-                    if (reportKey && (reportKey in selectedTransactions || areAllMatchingItemsSelected)) {
+                    if (reportKey && !Object.hasOwn(excludedTransactions, reportKey) && (reportKey in selectedTransactions || areAllMatchingItemsSelected)) {


Any reason for not using !excludedTransactions[reportKey]?

excludedTransactions is a key-presence map, so Object.hasOwn() checks whether the report key is explicitly excluded instead of relying on the value’s truthiness. It also matches the other exclusion checks in this flow.

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T15:23:33Z


                for (const transactionItem of transactionGroup.transactions) {
                    const listKey = transactionItem.keyForList ?? transactionItem.transactionID;
+                    const isExcluded = Object.hasOwn(excludedTransactions, listKey) || Object.hasOwn(excludedTransactions, transactionItem.transactionID);


Same here. Why Object.hasOwn used?

For the same reason: exclusions are identified by key presence. The map may use either keyForList or transactionID, so Object.hasOwn() explicitly checks both possible keys and matches the other selection-map checks.

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T15:27:33Z

+        if (isExpenseReportType) {
+            return new Set(
+                Object.values(transactions)
+                    .map((transaction) => transaction.reportID)
+                    .filter((reportID): reportID is string => !!reportID),
+            ).size;


As discussed, please make sure that this PR doesn't affect production behavior on Spend > Reports tab

Addressed. I restored Spend > Reports to its existing main behavior and scoped the new exclusion handling to type:expense.

Reports no longer preserve all-matching mode or apply exclusion-aware counters, totals, pagination, bulk-bar, checkbox, or export behavior. The existing Reports count issue remains unchanged and will be handled separately.

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T15:30:38Z

@@ -400,18 +412,36 @@ function Search({
            return;
        }

+        // Once a totals request for an already-loaded page completes, `shouldCalculateTotals` switches
+        // back to false. Do not immediately repeat that same page request without totals; the next real
+        // pagination offset change will trigger the appropriate request.
+        const didJustFinishAllMatchingTotalsRequest =
+            areAllMatchingItemsSelected &&
+            previousShouldCalculateTotals === true &&
+            !shouldCalculateTotals &&
+            typeof searchResults?.search?.count === 'number' &&
+            searchResults.search.offset === offset;
+        if (didJustFinishAllMatchingTotalsRequest) {
+            return;
+        }
+        const didEnableAllMatchingTotalsWithExistingCount =
+            areAllMatchingItemsSelected && previousShouldCalculateTotals === false && shouldCalculateTotals && typeof searchResults?.search?.count === 'number';
+        if (didEnableAllMatchingTotalsWithExistingCount) {
+            return;
+        }
+


What bug does this change fix?

This prevents duplicate Search requests introduced by the lazy totals flow in this PR:

When a totals response arrives, shouldCalculateTotals changes from true to false. Without the first guard, the same page is immediately requested again without totals.

When Select all is enabled and an authoritative count already exists, the second guard avoids requesting that same page again unnecessarily.

Both checks are scoped to the Expenses all-matching flow and prevent redundant requests caused by this fix.

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T16:06:05Z

There's a behavorial change.

no loading and immediate "All matching items selected" in this branch:

Screen.Recording.2026-07-19.at.4.59.57.PM.mov

loading and then "x selected" in production:

Screen.Recording.2026-07-19.at.4.59.49.PM.mov

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T16:06:55Z

Bug in offline mode:

"All matching items selected" even when there are unselected items

Screen.Recording.2026-07-19.at.5.04.03.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-07-19.at.5.05.33.PM.mov

mkhutornyi · 2026-07-19T16:17:38Z

@emkhalid please test & compare this branch with staging/production in both online/offline mode.
There should not be any behavioral change other than the original issue fix.

fix: preserve all matching selection after deselecting an expense

fc4c238

melvin-bot Bot assigned emkhalid Jul 11, 2026

fix: correct search selection test mock typings

dc68c95

emkhalid marked this pull request as ready for review July 12, 2026 19:55

emkhalid requested review from a team as code owners July 12, 2026 19:55

melvin-bot Bot requested review from flaviadefaria and mkhutornyi July 12, 2026 19:55

melvin-bot Bot removed request for a team July 12, 2026 19:55

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jul 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/components/Search/SearchSelectionProvider.tsx Outdated

emkhalid added 4 commits July 13, 2026 00:58

fix: resolve CI errors

bd2483e

fix: preserve all-matching bulk actions

b24c47a

Merge branch 'main' into fix/preserve-all-matching-selection

93d0337

fix: resolve search selection CI failures

f0b00c1

mkhutornyi mentioned this pull request Jul 14, 2026

94143 test #95332

Draft

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Jul 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/components/Search/SearchList/ListItem/TransactionGroupListItem.tsx Outdated

mkhutornyi reviewed Jul 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

emkhalid added 3 commits July 15, 2026 19:41

Merge branch 'main' into fix/preserve-all-matching-selection

a7280e1

Merge branch 'main' into fix/preserve-all-matching-selection

7fbe97c

Merge branch 'main' into fix/preserve-all-matching-selection

88f353e

Merge branch 'main' into fix/preserve-all-matching-selection

61fb693

Add context for deferred search offset update

64d00ae

emkhalid added 2 commits July 19, 2026 03:32

Fix unloaded grouped row selection flicker

3753e22

Fix totals request race during pagination

46a3bda

mkhutornyi reviewed Jul 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

emkhalid added 2 commits July 20, 2026 22:26

Restore Reports behavior and scope exclusions to Expenses

9e54de1

Restore production bulk selection loading behavior

0baeb37

Uh oh!

Conversation

emkhalid commented Jul 11, 2026 • 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 Jul 11, 2026 • 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 Jul 12, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mkhutornyi commented Jul 14, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jul 14, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jul 14, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mkhutornyi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jul 14, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jul 14, 2026

Uh oh!

emkhalid commented Jul 17, 2026

Uh oh!

mkhutornyi commented Jul 17, 2026

Uh oh!

emkhalid commented Jul 17, 2026

Uh oh!

emkhalid commented Jul 17, 2026

Uh oh!

emkhalid commented Jul 19, 2026

Uh oh!

emkhalid commented Jul 19, 2026

Uh oh!

emkhalid commented Jul 19, 2026

Uh oh!

mkhutornyi commented Jul 19, 2026

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

mkhutornyi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

emkhalid commented Jul 11, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Jul 11, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

mkhutornyi commented Jul 19, 2026 •

edited

Loading