New layout for Scan screen in landscape mode by GCyganek · Pull Request #87875 · Expensify/App

GCyganek · 2026-04-14T10:54:54Z

Explanation of Change

Changing layout of the Scan screen in landscape mode according to this and discussion here

Fixing #87318 by using takePhoto instead of takeSnapshot in landscape mode to capture full image

Fixing #87305 by showing full preview of the photo that will be taken

Fixed Issues

$ #77280
$ #87318
$ #87305
PROPOSAL: #85229 (comment)

Tests

Android:

Launch Expensify app in landscape mode.
Tap FAB > Create expense > Scan.
Snap a photo in landscape mode.
Rotate the device to portrait.
Tap on the receipt.
Verify that the full photo is taken

iOS:

Launch the app and login with any account being on landscape mode
Tap on FAB or the plus icon inside a chat
Tap on Create expense
Switch to scan
Complete the flow to see the end image and compare to what was showing during taking it
Verify that user can see the whole receipt when taking. a photo to scan on ladscape

Make sure that Scan screen functionalities work fine in landscape mode with new layout

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

android-scan-new-layout.mp4

iOS: Native

scan-new-layout-ios.mp4

GCyganek · 2026-04-14T10:55:16Z

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 095c8a0cbe

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".

codecov · 2026-04-14T11:13:46Z

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
...eceiptPreviews/SubmitButtonShadow/index.native.tsx	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
...nents/ReceiptPreviews/SubmitButtonShadow/index.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/styles/index.ts	`48.78% <ø> (ø)`
...questStepScan/components/ReceiptPreviews/index.tsx	`91.89% <91.66%> (-1.66%)`	⬇️
...IOURequestStepScan/captureReceipt/index.android.ts	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...st/step/IOURequestStepScan/getCameraAspectRatio.ts	`50.00% <50.00%> (ø)`
src/styles/utils/index.ts	`48.48% <0.00%> (-0.13%)`	⬇️
...u/request/step/IOURequestStepScan/index.native.tsx	`68.53% <70.58%> (+0.35%)`	⬆️
... and 8 files with indirect coverage changes

…ad of takeSnapshot

GCyganek · 2026-04-15T06:47:35Z

@codex review

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-04-15T07:06:47Z

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Already looking forward to the next diff.

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".

melvin-bot · 2026-04-15T11:08:17Z

@truph01 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]

GCyganek · 2026-04-15T11:11:39Z

@Expensify/design in case you want to test the new layout

shawnborton · 2026-04-15T13:32:01Z

Videos seem good but will run a test build.

github-actions · 2026-04-15T13:32:53Z

🚧 @shawnborton has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

shawnborton · 2026-04-15T15:25:38Z

The layout works well, but the confirmation screen is borked - the thumbnail has no height:

dubielzyk-expensify · 2026-04-16T03:09:39Z

Oh yeah weird. I thought we added like a min-height to that receipt

GCyganek · 2026-04-16T07:36:38Z

The layout works well, but the confirmation screen is borked - the thumbnail has no height:

This was reported and is fixed on this PR

shawnborton · 2026-04-16T07:41:15Z

Awesome, thanks for confirming!

truph01 · 2026-04-16T08:54:37Z

@GCyganek Could you merge main here?

truph01 · 2026-04-16T10:01:00Z

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 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

Android: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-04-16.at.16.36.48.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-04-16.at.18.15.00.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

truph01 · 2026-04-16T10:09:01Z

@GCyganek In src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepScan/index.native.tsx:

The current approach scatters isInLandscapeMode conditionals across 10+ places in the JSX tree (styles.flexRow, styles.permissionViewLandscape, getCameraViewfinderStyle(...), styles.pb4 : styles.pr4, horizontal={!isInLandscapeMode}, duplicated ReceiptPreviews, etc.), which makes the render logic hard to follow and increases the risk of accidentally breaking one orientation when editing the other.

Have you considered using an early return pattern instead?

if (isInLandscapeMode) {
    return (
        <StepScreenWrapper ...>
            {/* landscape-specific layout */}
        </StepScreenWrapper>
    );
}
return (
    <StepScreenWrapper ...>
        {/* portrait layout — unchanged from main */}
    </StepScreenWrapper>
);

GCyganek · 2026-04-16T10:32:28Z

@GCyganek In src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepScan/index.native.tsx:

The current approach scatters isInLandscapeMode conditionals across 10+ places in the JSX tree (styles.flexRow, styles.permissionViewLandscape, getCameraViewfinderStyle(...), styles.pb4 : styles.pr4, horizontal={!isInLandscapeMode}, duplicated ReceiptPreviews, etc.), which makes the render logic hard to follow and increases the risk of accidentally breaking one orientation when editing the other.

Have you considered using an early return pattern instead?
if (isInLandscapeMode) {
    return (
        <StepScreenWrapper ...>
            {/* landscape-specific layout */}
        </StepScreenWrapper>
    );
}
return (
    <StepScreenWrapper ...>
        {/* portrait layout — unchanged from main */}
    </StepScreenWrapper>
);

Hmmm yeah maybe it would be cleaner here, haven't thought about this change after I finished. I think it's a good idea, will try in a moment

…adjustments-landscape-mode

GCyganek · 2026-04-16T11:04:17Z

@truph01 I tried to do that separation based on isInLandscapeMode, but I ended up with two big chunks of jsx (each 250 lines) where they only differ in 6 places where different styles are applied based on the orientation. I think this component is a great candidate for a refactor to split these 250 lines into separate components, but I'd prefer to not do this on this PR

truph01 · 2026-04-16T11:15:53Z

@truph01 I tried to do that separation based on isInLandscapeMode, but I ended up with two big chunks of jsx (each 250 lines) where they only differ in 6 places where different styles are applied based on the orientation. I think this component is a great candidate for a refactor to split these 250 lines into separate components, but I'd prefer to not do this on this PR

I agree

mountiny

@GCyganek Can you please create an issue to refactor the component?

mountiny · 2026-04-17T03:00:13Z

 };

-function ReceiptPreviews({submit, isMultiScanEnabled, isCapturingPhoto = false}: ReceiptPreviewsProps) {
+function useReceiptPreviewsSizes(isInLandscapeMode: boolean) {


Methods and utils like this should have unit tests, can you add that in future pr?

added #88199

github-actions · 2026-04-17T03:17:29Z

🚧 @mountiny has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

OSBotify · 2026-04-17T03:17:46Z

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

github-actions · 2026-04-17T03:22:03Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #87875.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-d2c8c31-2665fac-df6d350ab668c79327029f9c49b7d6bf902c82e7/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-d2c8c31-2665fac-bd6b83fa6b5aac60ecf1f7f393e9b74645231c4d/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://87875.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

New layout for Scan screen in landscape mode

095c8a0

melvin-bot bot assigned GCyganek Apr 14, 2026

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Apr 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepScan/components/ReceiptPreviews/index.tsx

Code cleanup

ec1f746

Fix aspect ratio of preview in landscape mode and use takePhoto inste…

c1a493e

…ad of takeSnapshot

GCyganek marked this pull request as ready for review April 15, 2026 11:08

GCyganek requested review from a team as code owners April 15, 2026 11:08

melvin-bot bot requested review from heyjennahay and truph01 and removed request for a team and heyjennahay April 15, 2026 11:08

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team April 15, 2026 11:08

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Merge branch 'main' into @GCyganek/landscape-mode/Scan-screen-layout-…

fdb92e3

…adjustments-landscape-mode

truph01 approved these changes Apr 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from mountiny April 17, 2026 02:39

mountiny approved these changes Apr 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

mountiny merged commit d2c8c31 into Expensify:main Apr 17, 2026
36 checks passed

This was referenced Apr 17, 2026

Refactor: IOURequestStepScan/index.native.tsx #88197

Open

[No QA] Add tests for useReceiptPreviewsSizes #88199

Merged

Conversation

GCyganek commented Apr 14, 2026 • edited by mountiny Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

GCyganek commented Apr 14, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Apr 14, 2026 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

GCyganek commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

GCyganek commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

shawnborton commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

shawnborton commented Apr 15, 2026

Uh oh!

dubielzyk-expensify commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

GCyganek commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

shawnborton commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

truph01 commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

truph01 commented Apr 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

truph01 commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

GCyganek commented Apr 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

GCyganek commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

truph01 commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mountiny Apr 17, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GCyganek Apr 17, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GCyganek Apr 17, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Apr 17, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Apr 17, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Apr 17, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

GCyganek commented Apr 14, 2026 •

edited by mountiny

Loading

codecov bot commented Apr 14, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

truph01 commented Apr 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading

GCyganek commented Apr 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading