Show Scanning in the date column and pin scanning expenses to the top of transaction lists

[wildan-m]

Explanation of Change

A freshly scanned receipt is created with a placeholder date of today at midnight, so the expense list shows a real-looking date for a receipt whose date isn't actually known yet — and under the default newest-first sort, the in-progress scan sinks below every other expense created that day, making it hard to track the scan's progress.

While the receipt is scanning, the date cell now shows "Scanning…" — the same treatment and copy the merchant cell already uses — and the row is pinned to the top of both the Expenses tab and the report's transaction table, regardless of the selected sort column or direction. Both changes key off the existing scanning state, so once the scan completes the row automatically reverts to its real date and chronological position with no extra plumbing. The pin takes precedence over the existing prioritization of rows that need attention, and only applies on the views that show the scanning state.

Fixed Issues

$ #89966
PROPOSAL: #89966 (comment)

Tests

1. Sign in with an account that has a workspace and create two manual expenses dated today (any amounts).
2. Press the global create button > Create expense > Scan, upload a receipt image, and create the expense.
3. While the receipt is still scanning, go to Reports > Expenses. Verify the scanning expense shows "Scanning…" in the Date column (alongside the merchant's existing "Scanning…") and sits at the top of the list under the default Date descending sort.
4. Click the Date header to switch to ascending. Verify the scanning row stays at the top.
5. Click the Amount header and check both directions. Verify the scanning row stays at the top even though its amount is 0, which would otherwise rank it last under descending.
6. Open the expense report that contains the scanning expense. Verify the transaction table also shows "Scanning…" in the Date column and keeps the row at the top in both Date sort directions.
7. Wait for the scan to complete. Verify the row reverts to the receipt's real date and sorts back into its normal position.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

1. Go offline, then create a scan expense (global create > Create expense > Scan).
2. Verify the expense stays in the scanning state: the Date column shows "Scanning…" and the row is pinned to the top of the Expenses tab and the report's transaction table under any sort.
3. Go back online. Verify the scan completes and the row reverts to its real date and normal sort position.

QA Steps

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 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
  • 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

Expenses tab, Date descending — the scanning expense is pinned to the top and shows "Scanning…" in the Date column:

Expenses tab, Amount descending — the scanning expense stays pinned even though its amount of 0 would rank it last:

Report transaction table, Date ascending — pinned above the rows flagged for attention:

Report transaction table, Date descending:

[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
...components/Search/SearchList/ListItem/DateCell.tsx	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ts/TransactionItemRow/TransactionItemRowNarrow.tsx	97.05% <ø> (+97.05%)	⬆️
...ents/TransactionItemRow/TransactionItemRowWide.tsx	96.22% <ø> (ø)
src/components/TransactionItemRow/index.tsx	95.45% <100.00%> (+12.37%)	⬆️
src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts	64.26% <100.00%> (+0.04%)	⬆️
src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts	87.87% <100.00%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
...stReportView/MoneyRequestReportTransactionList.tsx	0.58% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
... and 45 files with indirect coverage changes