[Due for payment 2025-03-10] [$125] Refactor getTrackExpenseInformation to use a parameter object

[neil-marcellini]

As part of the tracking issue, and as advised in its description, refactor getTrackExpenseInformation to use a parameter object.

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021892615722799321204
• Upwork Job ID: 1892615722799321204
• Last Price Increase: 2025-02-21
• Automatic offers:
• mkzie2 | Contributor | 106227000

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @VictoriaExpensify

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021892615722799321204

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @VictoriaExpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @s77rt (External)

[mkzie2]

Proposal

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

Refactor convertTrackedExpenseToRequest function to use a parameter object

What is the root cause of that problem?

This is an improvement

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

Wrap all parameters of this function into one object and in this object, we can have some sub-objects that will wrap the related data.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Line 3079 in 32cfa66

function getTrackExpenseInformation(

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

None

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[mkzie2]

@neil-marcellini Please assign me.

[KALU-c]

Proposal

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

The getTrackExpenseInformation function has too many parameters, making it hard to read, maintain, and update.

What is the root cause of that problem?

The function takes too many separate arguments instead of a single object, making it harder to read and manage.

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

Change getTrackExpenseInformation to take one object instead of a long list of arguments.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 3079 to 3101 in 32cfa66

	function getTrackExpenseInformation(
	parentChatReport: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Report>,
	participant: Participant,
	comment: string,
	amount: number,
	currency: string,
	created: string,
	merchant: string,
	receipt: OnyxEntry<Receipt>,
	category: string | undefined,
	tag: string | undefined,
	taxCode: string | undefined,
	taxAmount: number | undefined,
	billable: boolean | undefined,
	policy: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.Policy> | undefined,
	policyTagList: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.PolicyTagLists> | undefined,
	policyCategories: OnyxEntry<OnyxTypes.PolicyCategories> | undefined,
	payeeEmail = currentUserEmail,
	payeeAccountID = userAccountID,
	moneyRequestReportID = '',
	linkedTrackedExpenseReportAction?: OnyxTypes.ReportAction,
	existingTransactionID?: string,
	): TrackExpenseInformation | null {

Also, update all function calls to use the new object format.

App/src/libs/actions/IOU.ts

Lines 4821 to 4845 in 32cfa66

	getTrackExpenseInformation(
	currentChatReport,
	participant,
	comment,
	amount,
	currency,
	created,
	merchant,
	trackedReceipt,
	category,
	tag,
	taxCode,
	taxAmount,
	billable,
	policy,
	policyTagList,
	policyCategories,
	payeeEmail,
	payeeAccountID,
	moneyRequestReportID,
	linkedTrackedExpenseReportAction,
	isMovingTransactionFromTrackExpense && linkedTrackedExpenseReportAction && isMoneyRequestAction(linkedTrackedExpenseReportAction)
	? getOriginalMessage(linkedTrackedExpenseReportAction)?.IOUTransactionID
	: undefined,
	) ?? {};

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

None

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.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @KALU-c! 📣
Hey, it seems we don’t have your contributor details yet! You'll only have to do this once, and this is how we'll hire you on Upwork.
Please follow these steps:

1. Make sure you've read and understood the contributing guidelines.
2. Get the email address used to login to your Expensify account. If you don't already have an Expensify account, create one here. If you have multiple accounts (e.g. one for testing), please use your main account email.
3. Get the link to your Upwork profile. It's necessary because we only pay via Upwork. You can access it by logging in, and then clicking on your name. It'll look like this. If you don't already have an account, sign up for one here.
4. Copy the format below and paste it in a comment on this issue. Replace the placeholder text with your actual details.
   
   Format:

Contributor details
Your Expensify account email: <REPLACE EMAIL HERE>
Upwork Profile Link: <REPLACE LINK HERE>

[KALU-c]

Contributor details
Your Expensify account email: [email protected]
Upwork Profile Link: https://www.upwork.com/freelancers/~01154410394d30729e

[melvin-bot]

✅ Contributor details stored successfully. Thank you for contributing to Expensify!

[s77rt]

@mkzie2 @KALU-c Thank you for the proposals. Given that this is a straightforward change we'd go with the first proposal i.e. @mkzie2 `s

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed
Link to proposal

[melvin-bot]

Current assignee @neil-marcellini is eligible for the choreEngineerContributorManagement assigner, not assigning anyone new.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @mkzie2 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[melvin-bot]

Upwork job price has been updated to $125

[mkzie2]

@s77rt The PR is ready.

[melvin-bot]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.1.7-2 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• Refactor getTrackExpenseInformation function #57316

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2025-03-10. 🎊

For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:

• @s77rt requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @mkzie2 requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)

[melvin-bot]

@s77rt @VictoriaExpensify @s77rt The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the BugZero Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[s77rt]

No checklist is needed

[VictoriaExpensify]

Payment summary:
C: @mkzie2 paid $125 via Upwork
C+: @s77rt owed $125 via NewDot

[JmillsExpensify]

$125 approved for @s77rt