@dubielzyk-expensify @ZhenjaHorbach One of you needs to 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]

Can we see videos of this in action? Thanks!

@LukasMod
And do you need help with review ?

Perf PR, doesn’t have any new product considerations. Removing the tag and unsubscribing myself.

@shawnborton I added a video in the macOS web section simulating a slow internet connection. There’s a fading animation on the background component, so with a normal internet speed, the difference isn’t noticeable.

@ZhenjaHorbach Feel free if you have any suggestions

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
  • MacOS: Desktop
• 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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
• I verified proper code patterns were followed (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 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)
• 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
• If a new component is created I verified that:
  • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
  • The file is named correctly
  • 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
  • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
  • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
  • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
  • 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 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 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.
• 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

Hmm I can't really tell what's happening in your video - maybe you can show a fresh reload on the slow connection?

@shawnborton The problem earlier was that when entering SignIn, the image for large/small screens was immediately being loaded. By the time the splash screen disappears on the first entry, it was already downloaded (previously, both images). Now, the loading is separated depending on whether we have a large or small screen. In the video, you can see that the package with the description 131-d6a... (the image for large screens) is loaded separately only after the window is enlarged. After loaded, the background (building outlines) appears. There is a slight delay in this slow connection case compared to the rest (like hands/text), which is reused for both variants. This is the best case where I was actually able to notice any difference after this change from the user's perspective. Let me know if this explanation helps. Let me know if this explanation helps. If not, I will try making another video as suggested 👍

That makes sense but in order to properly review the PR, it would be great to see a video of how a user on a slow connection would experience going to new.expensify.com - can you show us please? Thanks!

@shawnborton I added new video to web section, with refresh for slow connection (Slow4G)

As for me, everything looks good !

Before the asset loads in, it almost seems like we have a slightly different color that is occupying the area - any idea how to fix that?

It's very very subtle but it is indeed different:

It's very very subtle but it is indeed different:

It took me a minute to figure out what the issue is 😂
You have a sharp eye

@shawnborton I analyzed the issue and looked into what might be causing this effect, and it’s not entirely obvious. In general, there’s no element that would directly cause it or be responsible for the rectangle itself. The area that sets the color applies it to almost the entire view, and it’s not a gradient. Even if we disable the entire image, the effect remains, and the slight difference is still there—the image just fits into that space with its background/opacity and effectively hides it.

For testing, below is the production page with the image disabled for both the current color and the fake one #672519. For the current color, I cropped a section and compared the colors with a picker:

They are #72519 and #92519, while the color set in the code is #72419 - which is strange to me. I tend to think this is some effect directly caused by the color itself and how it’s rendered by the browser. The effect occurs regardless of the presence of a background image or fadeIn animation, and it exists specifically for this color. There is no such effect If I change color to fake one:

By the way, on both of my screens, even at maximum brightness, it’s barely noticeable. It only becomes slightly more visible in recordings, which might again be due to some underlying transformations.
Below, I’ve attached another recording with throttled web. Is it noticeable to you at normal playback speed? I’m not sure it’s worth investigating further, as real users may not notice this on their devices without some extra frame-by-frame checks
https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/9c2ab2c8-ad82-4b56-a759-6fe47d2b6e1d

Alternatively, could you verify this directly on the built app rather than through the recording? Most of the time, to verify if it’s visible, I had to use recordings to make it more noticeable.

Cool, thanks for investigating. I poked around and it seems fine on production as it is:

But you are right, doubt anyone would notice - just something I happened to see so figured I'd mention it.

@LukasMod @ZhenjaHorbach would this be ready to review/merge now then?

@carlosmiceli From my side yes.

LGTM !

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/carlosmiceli in version: 9.2.3-0 🚀

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/carlosmiceli in version: 9.2.5-0 🚀

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/carlosmiceli in version: 9.2.8-0 🚀

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/francoisl in version: 9.2.8-4 🚀