Skip to content

Fix NoopProvider unsafe null assertion - #841

Merged
amyevans merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
rory-fix-noop-provider
Nov 14, 2026
Merged

amyevans merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
rory-fix-noop-provider

Conversation

@roryabraham

@roryabraham roryabraham commented Sep 7, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Details

Removes null as OnyxValue<typeof _key> from NoopProvider.getItem via a typed emptyOnyxValue overload whose implementation returns null without an assertion.

This is a small, main-based fix so the corresponding eslint.seatbelt.tsv row in #802 can be dropped after merge.

Related Issues

For #802

Linked E/App PR

None - no runtime changes.

Automated Tests

No new tests. Type-only change. npx tsc --noEmit passes.

Manual Tests

  1. Open lib/storage/providers/NoopProvider.ts and confirm getItem has no as assertion.
  2. Run npx tsc --noEmit and confirm it passes.

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
  • 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

@roryabraham roryabraham self-assigned this Sep 7, 2026
@roryabraham
roryabraham requested a review from a team September 7, 2026 18:50
@roryabraham

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@codex review
@MelvinBot review

@roryabraham roryabraham mentioned this pull request Sep 7, 2026
1 of 42 tasks
@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. 🚀

Reviewed commit: af6e8fa044

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".

@roryabraham
roryabraham removed the request for review from a team November 14, 2026 01:42
@roryabraham
roryabraham marked this pull request as ready for review November 14, 2026 01:42
@roryabraham
roryabraham requested a review from a team as a code owner November 14, 2026 01:42
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 14, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Codex Review Summary: ✅ Completed

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-11-14T01:43:40.676984Z af6e8fa Draft marked ready
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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@roryabraham
roryabraham requested review from amyevans and removed request for a team November 14, 2026 01:49
@roryabraham

roryabraham commented Nov 14, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

The checklist and "require tests" CI checks don't make sense here because there are no runtime changes. This is a type-only change.

@amyevans amyevans closed this Nov 14, 2026
@amyevans amyevans reopened this Nov 14, 2026
@amyevans
amyevans merged commit 39578d0 into main Nov 14, 2026
16 of 22 checks passed
@amyevans
amyevans deleted the rory-fix-noop-provider branch November 14, 2026 15:25
@os-botify

os-botify Bot commented Nov 14, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Published to npm in 3.0.152 🎉

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants