Defer mounting Search filter dropdown content until opened

[TMisiukiewicz]

Explanation of Change

Opening a Search page (e.g. "Needs approval" with a from: filter set) rendered every active filter chip's dropdown body eagerly, before the dropdown was ever opened. This happened because PopoverWithMeasuredContentBase mounts its children even while isVisible={false}, so FilterPopupButton building popoverContent unconditionally on every render caused each filter selector (from/to/category/tag/…) to mount and run its option-list build on screen focus — including the expensive usePersonalDetailSearchSelector hook (~800ms on large accounts) used by the user selector.

This change defers mounting the popover content until the dropdown is first opened, latched via a new hasEverExpanded state so it stays mounted afterward (close animation and reopening remain instant). popoverContent is null until first open, so nothing heavy mounts on page load — the cost is paid once, on the user's first click, behind the existing loading placeholder.

Performance impact: On large customer account, this saves ~800ms of computations on opening Needs approval page. Computation on filter opening happened before anyway and it lasts ~200ms - nothing changed here

Fixed Issues

$ #96288
PROPOSAL:

Tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

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

Same as tests

• 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
• 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 followed proper code patterns (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 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)
• 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.
• 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.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mov

[codecov]

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
...nents/Search/FilterDropdowns/FilterPopupButton.tsx	86.20% <66.66%> (-2.69%)	⬇️
... and 37 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@carlosmiceli 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: c05319cb08

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".

[mountiny]

@MelvinBot review

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR improves Search page performance by preventing heavy filter dropdown content from mounting until the user actually opens a filter dropdown, avoiding expensive option-building work during initial page focus/render (notably in large accounts).

Changes:

• Added a hasEverExpanded latch to defer popover content mounting until the dropdown is first opened.
• Updated popover content creation to return null until the first open, while keeping content mounted afterward for fast reopen/close animations.

---

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

[MelvinBot]

Review: LGTM ✅

The approach is correct and low-risk. I verified the premise, the safety of the conditional, and the latching behavior.

Why it works (premise confirmed): POPOVER_DROPDOWN_MIN_HEIGHT: 0 means PopoverWithMeasuredContentBase starts with isContentMeasured = popoverWidth > 0 && popoverHeight > 0 → false, so it takes the invisible-measuring branch that renders {children} unconditionally regardless of isVisible. That's exactly why each filter selector mounted (and ran its option-building/usePersonalDetailSearchSelector) on page focus. Gating popoverContent to null until first open leaves that measuring view empty on load, deferring the cost to first click.

No Rules-of-Hooks risk (the thing I was most worried about): PopoverComponent is invoked as a plain function (PopoverComponent({...})) inside FilterPopupButton's render, so at first glance making that call conditional looks dangerous. But every call site returns JSX (e.g. () => <FilterPopup … />), not hooks in the function body — the heavy hooks live inside the child components React mounts. So returning null only changes whether the element descriptors get created; FilterPopupButton's own hook list is unchanged. Safe. Worth keeping in mind if any future PopoverComponent implementation ever calls a hook directly in its body — that would break this pattern.

Latching is correct: hasEverExpanded stays true after first open, so close animation and reopen remain instant, and first-open measurement happens correctly (dimensions start unmeasured anyway) behind the existing loading placeholder.

Minor, non-blocking observations

• Re-focus cost persists. hasEverExpanded lives on the FilterPopupButton instance, but the popover subtree is gated by isFocused. After a user opens a filter once, navigating away and back re-mounts the content eagerly on focus (since hasEverExpanded is still true). This is no worse than today (it was eager on every focus before), and the primary win — initial page load — is preserved. Just noting the optimization only covers the first focus.
• No automated regression test. Understandable for a perf-only change, but a small test asserting the selector isn't rendered until the dropdown is first opened would lock in the win against future refactors of this file.

Nice, tightly-scoped fix — the inline comment explaining why the deferral is needed is exactly the kind of context this warrants.

[ZhenjaHorbach]

Actually, we have a small visual glitch with this optimisation
The fact that when we first open the modal, it opens in a collapsed state for a split second

2026-07-16.14.26.09.mov

[ZhenjaHorbach]

Although it is difficult to notice on video 😅
And it's minor in any case

[ZhenjaHorbach]

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

2026-07-16.14.42.43.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

2026-07-16.14.40.21.mov

iOS: HybridApp

2026-07-16.14.42.43.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

2026-07-16.14.40.21.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

2026-07-16.14.43.39.mov

[ZhenjaHorbach]

Although it is difficult to notice on video 😅 And it's minor in any case

But okay
On staging, we have a similar visual glitch

[mountiny]

Is it same on staging? I can notice it in your video

[trjExpensify]

PR doesn’t need product input as a refactor PR. Unassigning and unsubscribing myself.

[ZhenjaHorbach]

Yeah
The same is in staging 😅
Let's merge then!