Fix FOUC by moving stylesheet loading to head (#TBD) #684

justin808 · 2025-10-14T22:40:08Z

Summary

Moved stylesheet_pack_tag from bottom of <body> to <head> section in application.html.erb
Fixes flash of unstyled content (FOUC) visible on https://staging.reactrails.com/ and other pages

Problem

The stylesheet was loading at the end of the body (line 23), after React components had already started rendering. This caused a noticeable FOUC where:

Navigation bar and content appeared unstyled initially
Tailwind CSS classes weren't applied until after page load
User experience was poor with visible style flashing

Solution

Stylesheets should always be loaded in the <head> to ensure styles are available before any content renders. The stylesheet_pack_tag is now loaded in the head alongside other pack tags, while JavaScript remains deferred at the bottom for optimal performance.

Test Plan

Visit https://staging.reactrails.com/ and verify no FOUC
Navigate to https://staging.reactrails.com/no-router and verify no FOUC
Check all pages load with styles immediately applied

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

This change is

Summary by CodeRabbit

Bug Fixes
- Prevents flashes of unstyled content and inconsistent styling during page transitions by ensuring styles load earlier in the document head.
- Improves visual stability and reduces layout shifts when navigating between views.
Refactor
- Moved stylesheet loading to the document head for more predictable rendering while leaving script loading behavior unchanged.

coderabbitai · 2025-10-14T22:40:17Z

Walkthrough

Moved stylesheet_pack_tag calls from the <body> into the <head> in two layout templates so CSS is emitted earlier; JavaScript pack tags and other asset declarations unchanged.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Layout assets placement `app/views/layouts/application.html.erb`, `app/views/layouts/stimulus_layout.html.erb`	Relocated `stylesheet_pack_tag` into `<head>` (added with `media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true` / `'reload'` as present) and removed the body-level stylesheet tag(s). `javascript_pack_tag`/stimulus bundle left unchanged.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
  participant Browser
  participant RailsView as Layout ERB
  Note over RailsView: Before — stylesheet_pack_tag emitted in <body>
  Browser->>RailsView: GET /
  RailsView-->>Browser: HTML (CSS tag in <body>)
  Note over Browser: CSS loads late (possible FOUC)

  par After change
    Note over RailsView: Now emits stylesheet_pack_tag in <head>
    Browser->>RailsView: GET /
    RailsView-->>Browser: HTML (CSS tag in <head>)
    Note over Browser: CSS loads earlier during head parse
  end

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Possibly related issues

Documentation: Clarify stylesheet_pack_tag should be in <head> to prevent FOUC shakapacker#720 — Same template-level change: move stylesheet_pack_tag into <head> to avoid FOUC.

Poem

I hopped a line from tail to crown,
Pushed styles up so pages gown;
Turbolinks whispers, scripts stay kind—
A smoother paint for every mind. 🐇✨

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title Check	✅ Passed	The title succinctly summarizes the primary change—moving stylesheet loading to the head to fix the flash of unstyled content—and directly reflects the pull request’s objective without extraneous detail.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changes. Docstring coverage check skipped.

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests
Post copyable unit tests in a comment
Commit unit tests in branch fix-fouc

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9e89bf4 and fcaf7f1.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

app/views/layouts/application.html.erb (1 hunks)
app/views/layouts/stimulus_layout.html.erb (1 hunks)

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

app/views/layouts/application.html.erb

🔇 Additional comments (2)

app/views/layouts/stimulus_layout.html.erb (2)

9-9: LGTM! Correctly fixes FOUC.

Moving the stylesheet pack tag to the <head> ensures styles load before content renders, which directly addresses the flash of unstyled content issue described in the PR objectives.

10-10: Verify append_javascript_pack_tag deferral and placement

Confirm whether Shakapacker’s append_javascript_pack_tag helper automatically defers or buffers scripts for execution at the end of the body.

If it doesn’t, add defer: true or move the call below the existing <%= javascript_pack_tag … defer: true %> to meet the PR’s performance objectives.

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

claude · 2025-10-14T22:42:52Z

Code Review - PR #684: Fix FOUC by moving stylesheet to head

Summary

This PR moves the stylesheet_pack_tag from the bottom of the body to the head section to fix Flash of Unstyled Content (FOUC). The change is well-justified and technically correct.

Strengths

Problem Correctly Identified: Moving stylesheets to the head is a web development best practice that prevents FOUC.
Minimal, Surgical Change: The PR touches only what's necessary - a single line move. This reduces risk.
Clear Documentation: The PR description clearly explains the problem, solution, and includes a test plan.
Performance Considerations: The change maintains proper performance patterns by keeping JavaScript deferred at the bottom.

Code Quality Review

File: app/views/layouts/application.html.erb:9

✅ Correct placement in the head section
✅ Maintains consistency with other stylesheet tags
✅ Preserves attributes

Potential Issues and Questions

Missing pack name parameter: Line 9 has stylesheet_pack_tag without an explicit pack name. Typically this takes a pack name as first parameter. Verify this works as intended with your Shakapacker setup.
Turbolinks/Turbo consideration: The attribute uses data-turbolinks-track: true. Consider if this should be data-turbo-track: reload for Turbo (Hotwire) since you have @hotwired/turbo-rails in dependencies.
No regression tests: Consider adding an automated test that verifies stylesheet placement in the head section.

Security Considerations

✅ No security concerns - only moves an existing tag.

Performance Considerations

✅ Positive impact: Moving CSS to head improves perceived performance. Browsers can parse CSS before rendering content, preventing reflows and repaints.

Test Coverage

⚠️ Manual testing only. Consider adding automated view specs.

Recommendations

Before merging:

Verify stylesheet_pack_tag works without explicit pack name
Consider updating Turbolinks syntax to Turbo
Update PR title to remove TBD

Nice to have:

Add automated view spec for stylesheet placement
Consider performance budget test or Lighthouse CI

Verdict

LGTM with minor verification needed ✅

The core change is correct and follows best practices. Please verify the pack name parameter behavior and consider the Turbolinks/Turbo syntax update. Once confirmed, this is ready to merge.

Great work identifying and fixing this FOUC issue!

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 1

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

app/views/layouts/application.html.erb (1)
9-9: Use "reload" for data-turbolinks-track
Update to the documented standard in app/views/layouts/application.html.erb:9:
- <%= stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true) %>
+ <%= stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': 'reload') %>

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between ec52aa1 and fa9361a.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

app/views/layouts/application.html.erb (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (1)

app/views/layouts/application.html.erb (1)

9-9: Good approach to fix FOUC.

Moving the stylesheet loading to the <head> is the correct solution to prevent flash of unstyled content. This ensures styles are loaded and parsed before content renders, which should eliminate the FOUC issues described in the PR objectives.

After fixing the pack name issue, verify the fix by visiting the staging URLs mentioned in the PR objectives and confirming no FOUC occurs.

coderabbitai · 2025-10-14T22:43:48Z

app/views/layouts/application.html.erb

  <title>RailsReactTutorial</title>

  <%= append_stylesheet_pack_tag('stimulus-bundle') %>
+  <%= stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true) %>


⚠️ Potential issue | 🔴 Critical

Missing pack name in stylesheet_pack_tag.

The stylesheet_pack_tag helper requires a pack name as the first positional argument. The current syntax stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true) is missing this required argument, which will likely cause a runtime error or fail to load any stylesheets.

Apply this diff to add the pack name (assuming 'application' is the main pack):

- <%= stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true) %> + <%= stylesheet_pack_tag 'application', media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true %>

If a different pack name should be used, please adjust accordingly. Verify this matches the pack name used in your Webpack/Shakapacker configuration.

📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change

<%= stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true) %>

<%= stylesheet_pack_tag 'application', media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true %>

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

In app/views/layouts/application.html.erb around line 9, the stylesheet_pack_tag call is missing the required pack name; update the helper to pass the main pack (e.g., "application") as the first argument so it reads stylesheet_pack_tag 'application', media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true (or replace "application" with the correct pack name used in your Webpack/webpacker/shakapacker config), ensuring the pack name matches your build configuration.

github-actions · 2025-10-14T22:44:28Z

🚀 Quick Review App Commands

Welcome! Here are the commands you can use in this PR:

`/deploy-review-app`

Deploy your PR branch for testing

`/delete-review-app`

Remove the review app when done

`/help`

Show detailed instructions, environment setup, and configuration options.

justin808 · 2025-10-15T03:22:38Z

/deploy-review-app

github-actions · 2025-10-15T03:23:43Z

🎉 ✨ Deploy Complete! 🚀

🌐 ➡️ Open Review App

Deployment successful for PR #684, commit fa9361a

🎮 Control Plane Console
📋 View Completed Action Build and Deploy Logs

github-actions · 2025-10-15T03:26:26Z

🎉 ✨ Deploy Complete! 🚀

🌐 ➡️ Open Review App

Deployment successful for PR #684, commit aecf463

🎮 Control Plane Console
📋 View Completed Action Build and Deploy Logs

claude · 2025-10-15T03:27:12Z

Pull Request Review - PR #684

Summary

This PR moves the stylesheet_pack_tag from the bottom of the <body> to the <head> section in application.html.erb to fix Flash of Unstyled Content (FOUC). This is a good and necessary change that follows web best practices.

✅ Positive Aspects

1. Correct Solution to FOUC

Moving stylesheets to the <head> is the standard and correct approach to prevent FOUC. This ensures CSS is loaded and parsed before the browser starts rendering content.

2. Clear Problem Description

The PR description clearly explains:

The problem (FOUC visible on staging)
The root cause (stylesheet loading after React components)
The solution (move to head)

3. Performance Best Practice Maintained

JavaScript remains deferred at the bottom of the body with defer: true, which is optimal for page load performance.

4. Minimal Change

The change is surgical - only one line moved, reducing risk of introducing bugs.

⚠️ Issues Found

Critical: Inconsistent Fix Across Layouts

The fix was applied to app/views/layouts/application.html.erb (line 8), but there's another layout file that has the same problem:

File: app/views/layouts/stimulus_layout.html.erb

Current state (line 22):

  <%= react_component "Footer" %>

  <%= stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true) %>
  <%= javascript_pack_tag('data-turbolinks-track': true, defer: true) %>
</body>

The stylesheet is still at the bottom of the body in this layout!

Recommendation: Apply the same fix to stimulus_layout.html.erb:

Move line 22's stylesheet_pack_tag to the head section (after line 8)
This ensures FOUC is fixed for all pages using this layout

💡 Code Quality & Best Practices

Good:

✅ Follows web standards for stylesheet loading
✅ Maintains proper separation: CSS in head, JS deferred at bottom
✅ Uses Rails helper methods correctly
✅ Preserves Turbolinks tracking attributes

No Issues Found:

No security concerns
No performance regressions (actually improves perceived performance)
No breaking changes to functionality

🧪 Test Coverage

Observation:

The PR includes a manual test plan in the description, but there are no automated tests to verify FOUC is fixed.

Recommendation:

While FOUC is difficult to test automatically, consider:

System/Integration Test Enhancement: The existing spec/system/pages_spec.rb could be extended to verify stylesheet loading order:

it "loads stylesheets in head section" do
  visit root_path
  expect(page).to have_css('head link[rel="stylesheet"]', visible: false)
end

Layout Test: Add a view spec to verify tag order:

# spec/views/layouts/application.html.erb_spec.rb
it "loads stylesheets before body content" do
  render template: "layouts/application"
  # Verify stylesheet_pack_tag appears in head
end

However, manual visual verification is still essential for FOUC issues.

🔒 Security Considerations

No security concerns. The change only affects load order, not content or behavior.

📊 Performance Considerations

Positive Impact:

✅ Faster perceived load time - Content renders with styles immediately
✅ Better user experience - No visual "flash" of unstyled content
✅ No negative performance impact - Stylesheets should always be in head

Note on Render-Blocking:

While CSS in the head is render-blocking by design, this is intentional and correct behavior. The browser needs CSS parsed before rendering to avoid FOUC. The small delay is worth the improved visual stability.

📝 Recommendations Summary

Must Fix (Blocking):

Apply the same fix to stimulus_layout.html.erb - Move the stylesheet tag from line 22 to the head section

Should Consider (Nice to Have):

Add basic automated test to verify stylesheet loading order
Update test plan in PR description to include testing routes that use stimulus_layout.html.erb

Optional:

Consider documenting this pattern in project documentation to prevent regression

✅ Approval Status

Status: ✅ Approve with Required Changes

The core fix is correct and necessary, but the inconsistent application across layout files needs to be addressed before merging.

Once stimulus_layout.html.erb is updated with the same fix, this PR will be ready to merge.

Great work identifying and fixing this FOUC issue! The solution is spot-on, just needs to be applied consistently across all layouts.

justin808 · 2025-10-15T07:22:07Z

/deploy-review-app

github-actions · 2025-10-15T07:23:12Z

🎉 ✨ Deploy Complete! 🚀

🌐 ➡️ Open Review App

Deployment successful for PR #684, commit 9e89bf4

🎮 Control Plane Console
📋 View Completed Action Build and Deploy Logs

github-actions · 2025-10-15T07:26:10Z

🎉 ✨ Deploy Complete! 🚀

🌐 ➡️ Open Review App

Deployment successful for PR #684, commit 9e89bf4

🎮 Control Plane Console
📋 View Completed Action Build and Deploy Logs

claude · 2025-10-15T07:26:24Z

PR Review: Fix FOUC by moving stylesheet loading to head

Summary

This PR addresses a Flash of Unstyled Content (FOUC) issue by moving the stylesheet_pack_tag from the bottom of <body> to the <head> section in application.html.erb. The change is well-motivated and follows web best practices.

✅ Code Quality & Best Practices

Excellent:

✅ The change follows the fundamental web development best practice of loading CSS in <head> to ensure styles are available before content renders
✅ JavaScript remains deferred at the bottom for optimal performance (non-blocking)
✅ The fix is minimal, surgical, and easy to understand
✅ Clear and descriptive PR description with problem statement, solution, and test plan
✅ Consistent with modern web performance optimization patterns

Recommendation:
Consider applying the same fix to app/views/layouts/stimulus_layout.html.erb, which still has the same FOUC issue on line 22:

<%= stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true) %>

🐛 Potential Issues

Critical - Duplicate Layout:

stimulus_layout.html.erb has the same problem but was not updated in this PR
This will cause inconsistent behavior across different parts of the application
Action Required: Update stimulus_layout.html.erb with the same fix

Minor - Parameter Syntax:

The stylesheet_pack_tag call uses positional arguments for options, which may cause issues
Current: stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true)
This syntax is non-standard - typically the first argument should be the pack name
Consider: Verify this is the intended syntax for your Shakapacker version (9.1.0)
Standard syntax would be: stylesheet_pack_tag('application', media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true)

⚡ Performance Considerations

Positive Impact:

✅ Eliminates FOUC, significantly improving perceived performance and user experience
✅ Styles load and parse before DOM rendering begins
✅ Reduces Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) - a Core Web Vital
✅ JavaScript remains deferred, maintaining non-blocking script loading

Potential Trade-off:

Moving CSS to <head> is render-blocking, but this is the correct trade-off
The alternative (CSS at bottom) causes worse UX issues (FOUC) than the minimal blocking from CSS parsing
Given Tailwind CSS usage, ensure production builds are minified and purged of unused styles

Recommendations:

Monitor initial page load times before/after deployment
Consider adding preload hints if CSS bundles are large
Verify Tailwind CSS purging is configured correctly to minimize CSS bundle size

🔒 Security Concerns

No Issues Found:

✅ Change only affects asset loading order
✅ data-turbolinks-track and CSRF meta tags remain properly configured
✅ No new dependencies or external resources introduced

🧪 Test Coverage

Missing:

❌ No automated tests for layout rendering behavior
❌ No visual regression tests to catch FOUC issues
❌ Test plan relies on manual verification only

Recommendations:

Integration Test: Add a system/integration test that verifies stylesheets are loaded in <head>:

# spec/views/layouts/application.html.erb_spec.rb
require 'rails_helper'

RSpec.describe "layouts/application" do
  it "loads stylesheets in head section" do
    render
    expect(rendered).to match(/<head>.*stylesheet_pack_tag.*<\/head>/m)
    expect(rendered).not_to match(/<body>.*stylesheet_pack_tag.*<\/body>/m)
  end
end

Visual Regression: Consider using a tool like Percy or Chromatic for visual regression testing
Manual Test Checklist: The PR includes a good manual test plan - ensure all items are checked before merging:
- Visit staging.reactrails.com and verify no FOUC
- Navigate to /no-router and verify no FOUC
- Test with slow network throttling to ensure styles load early

📋 Action Items

Before Merging:

Critical: Apply the same fix to app/views/layouts/stimulus_layout.html.erb
Verify the stylesheet_pack_tag syntax is correct for your Shakapacker version
Complete manual testing checklist
Consider adding automated test coverage

Post-Merge:

Monitor production metrics for any performance regressions
Verify FOUC is resolved on production
Consider backporting to other branches if applicable

🎯 Overall Assessment

Verdict: Approve with Required Changes

This is a well-intentioned fix that addresses a real UX issue. The approach is correct and follows best practices. However, the PR is incomplete because it only fixes one of two layout files.

Score: 8/10

Code Quality: 9/10
Completeness: 6/10 (missing stimulus_layout.html.erb)
Testing: 5/10 (manual only, no automation)
Documentation: 10/10 (excellent PR description)

Great work identifying and fixing this issue! Once you address the duplicate layout file and verify the syntax, this will be ready to merge.

justin808 · 2025-10-15T07:28:32Z

/deploy-review-app

The stylesheet_pack_tag was loading at the bottom of the body, causing a flash of unstyled content (FOUC) as React components rendered before CSS loaded. Moving it to the head ensures styles are loaded before content renders. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <[email protected]>

github-actions · 2025-10-15T07:30:39Z

🎉 ✨ Deploy Complete! 🚀

🌐 ➡️ Open Review App

Deployment successful for PR #684, commit fcaf7f1

🎮 Control Plane Console
📋 View Completed Action Build and Deploy Logs

github-actions · 2025-10-15T07:31:28Z

🎉 ✨ Deploy Complete! 🚀

🌐 ➡️ Open Review App

Deployment successful for PR #684, commit fcaf7f1

🎮 Control Plane Console
📋 View Completed Action Build and Deploy Logs

claude · 2025-10-15T07:38:57Z

Pull Request Review - PR #684

Overview

This PR moves stylesheet_pack_tag from the bottom of <body> to the <head> section to fix Flash of Unstyled Content (FOUC). This is a well-documented issue with a straightforward solution.

✅ Positive Findings

1. Code Quality & Best Practices

Excellent problem identification: Moving stylesheets to <head> is the correct and standard solution for FOUC
Consistent changes: Both layout files (application.html.erb and stimulus_layout.html.erb) are updated consistently
Minimal scope: The change is focused and doesn't introduce unnecessary modifications
Good documentation: PR description clearly explains the problem, solution, and test plan

2. Performance Considerations

Optimal placement: Stylesheets in <head> prevent FOUC while JavaScript remains deferred at bottom with defer: true attribute
Render-blocking is intentional: Stylesheets should be render-blocking to prevent FOUC - this is the correct behavior
No performance regression: The change improves perceived performance by eliminating visual flashing

3. Security

No security concerns: The change is purely positional and doesn't introduce new security vectors
Existing security attributes preserved: data-turbolinks-track: true and csrf_meta_tags remain in place

🔍 Observations & Suggestions

1. Testing Considerations
The test plan mentions manual testing on staging, but I notice this repository has system specs in spec/system/. Consider:

Adding a system spec to verify stylesheets are present in <head> before content renders
Example location: spec/system/pages_spec.rb could include a check for stylesheet presence in the head

2. Minor: Turbolinks Attribute Syntax
Current syntax:

<%= stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true) %>

This works, but you might consider the more explicit Turbolinks helper pattern if available:

<%= stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', data: { turbolinks_track: 'reload' }) %>

(Only if your Rails/Turbolinks version supports this pattern - the current syntax is perfectly valid)

3. Consistency Check
Both modified layouts follow the same pattern:

✅ append_stylesheet_pack_tag('stimulus-bundle') - line 8
✅ stylesheet_pack_tag (main stylesheet) - line 9
✅ JavaScript pack tags follow
✅ csrf_meta_tags at end of head

This ordering looks correct and consistent.

📊 Test Coverage Assessment

Existing tests: Repository has system specs that test page rendering
Recommendation: Consider adding a spec to assert stylesheet loading order, especially since FOUC was a production issue
Example assertion: Check that stylesheet_pack_tag appears in response body before <body> tag

🎯 Overall Assessment

Verdict: ✅ LGTM (Looks Good To Me)

This is a solid, well-documented fix for a common web performance issue. The changes are:

✅ Correct implementation of FOUC prevention
✅ Consistent across affected files
✅ No security or performance regressions
✅ Clear PR description with test plan

Recommendation: Approve and merge after:

Manual verification on staging (as outlined in test plan)
(Optional) Consider adding a regression test

Great work on identifying and fixing this issue!

Review generated by Claude Code - focusing on code quality, security, performance, and best practices

justin808 · 2025-10-15T08:39:49Z

Closing this PR. The original layout structure was correct - moving stylesheet_pack_tag to the head causes errors because react_component calls internally use append_stylesheet_pack_tag, which must be called before the main stylesheet_pack_tag is rendered.

FOUC needs to be addressed through alternative approaches like server-side rendering, inline critical CSS, or webpack/rspack configuration optimizations.

github-actions · 2025-10-15T08:49:57Z

✅ Review app for PR #684 was successfully deleted

View Completed Delete Logs

Control Plane Organization

justin808 · 2025-10-16T00:48:55Z

Reopening with proper fix: disabled auto_load_bundle to prevent react_component from calling append_stylesheet_pack_tag during render, allowing us to safely move stylesheet_pack_tag to the head.

justin808 mentioned this pull request Oct 14, 2025

Documentation: Clarify stylesheet_pack_tag should be in <head> to prevent FOUC shakacode/shakapacker#720

Closed

coderabbitai bot requested changes Oct 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

github-actions bot temporarily deployed to review October 15, 2025 03:23 Inactive

justin808 force-pushed the fix-fouc branch from fa9361a to aecf463 Compare October 15, 2025 03:25

github-actions bot temporarily deployed to review October 15, 2025 03:26 Inactive

justin808 force-pushed the fix-fouc branch from aecf463 to 9e89bf4 Compare October 15, 2025 07:22

github-actions bot temporarily deployed to review October 15, 2025 07:23 Inactive

github-actions bot temporarily deployed to review October 15, 2025 07:26 Inactive

justin808 force-pushed the fix-fouc branch from 9e89bf4 to fcaf7f1 Compare October 15, 2025 07:29

github-actions bot temporarily deployed to review October 15, 2025 07:30 Inactive

github-actions bot temporarily deployed to review October 15, 2025 07:31 Inactive

justin808 closed this Oct 15, 2025

	<%= stylesheet_pack_tag(media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true) %>
	<%= stylesheet_pack_tag 'application', media: 'all', 'data-turbolinks-track': true %>

Fix FOUC by moving stylesheet loading to head (#TBD) #684

Fix FOUC by moving stylesheet loading to head (#TBD) #684

Uh oh!

Conversation

justin808 commented Oct 14, 2025 • edited by coderabbitai bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

Problem

Solution

Test Plan

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Walkthrough

Changes

Sequence Diagram(s)

Estimated code review effort

Possibly related issues

Poem

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

Uh oh!

claude bot commented Oct 14, 2025

Code Review - PR #684: Fix FOUC by moving stylesheet to head

Summary

Strengths

Code Quality Review

Potential Issues and Questions

Security Considerations

Performance Considerations

Test Coverage

Recommendations

Verdict

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot Oct 14, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Oct 14, 2025

🚀 Quick Review App Commands

/deploy-review-app

/delete-review-app

/help

Uh oh!

justin808 commented Oct 15, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Oct 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🎉 ✨ Deploy Complete! 🚀

🌐 ➡️ Open Review App

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Oct 15, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🎉 ✨ Deploy Complete! 🚀

🌐 ➡️ Open Review App

Uh oh!

claude bot commented Oct 15, 2025

Pull Request Review - PR #684

Summary

✅ Positive Aspects

1. Correct Solution to FOUC

2. Clear Problem Description

3. Performance Best Practice Maintained

4. Minimal Change

⚠️ Issues Found

Critical: Inconsistent Fix Across Layouts

💡 Code Quality & Best Practices

Good:

No Issues Found:

🧪 Test Coverage

Observation:

Recommendation:

🔒 Security Considerations

📊 Performance Considerations

Positive Impact:

Note on Render-Blocking:

📝 Recommendations Summary

Must Fix (Blocking):

justin808 commented Oct 14, 2025 •

edited by coderabbitai bot

Loading

coderabbitai bot commented Oct 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading

`/deploy-review-app`

`/delete-review-app`

`/help`

github-actions bot commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Oct 15, 2025 •

edited

Loading