chore: Performance testing with reassure

[tommasini]

Description

This is a DRAFT PR that aims to test the reassure library to measure performance.

If you want to try it yourself just runyarn reassure after adding some testing! Check the docs here

Challenges/downsides so far:

• Everything should be mocked to work (our unit testing were not mocking for example the dispatch function returned by useDispatch())
• Takes time to run
• Didn't discover yet or it's not possible to run the testing on a single file which turns out to be some time consuming
• The results will be different to each machine so the source of truth should be the github CI and not the results on our local machine

Upsides:

• It can re-run a scenario multiple times (it's good to test multiple interactions on the wallet view exg: Change account and change network and open wallet actions)
• Easy let us enable quality gates, since the results should be the same on the same machine
• Easy integration with react-native testing library (That we are doing efforts to migrate too)

Related issues

Fixes:

Manual testing steps

1. Go to this page...

Screenshots/Recordings

Before

After

Pre-merge author checklist

• I’ve followed MetaMask Contributor Docs and MetaMask Mobile Coding Standards.
• I've completed the PR template to the best of my ability
• I’ve included tests if applicable
• I’ve documented my code using JSDoc format if applicable
• I’ve applied the right labels on the PR (see labeling guidelines). Not required for external contributors.

Pre-merge reviewer checklist

• I've manually tested the PR (e.g. pull and build branch, run the app, test code being changed).
• I confirm that this PR addresses all acceptance criteria described in the ticket it closes and includes the necessary testing evidence such as recordings and or screenshots.

[github-actions]

CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes.

[socket-security]

New dependencies detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎

Package	New capabilities	Transitives	Size	Publisher
npm/reassure@1.0.0	Transitive: environment, filesystem, shell, unsafe	+32	13.1 MB	mdjastrzebski

View full report↗︎

[socket-security]

🚨 Potential security issues detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎

To accept the risk, merge this PR and you will not be notified again.

Alert	Package	Note	Source	CI
Shell access	npm/simple-git@3.25.0	Module: child_process Location: Package overview	package.json	🚫

View full report↗︎

Next steps

What is shell access?

This module accesses the system shell. Accessing the system shell increases the risk of executing arbitrary code.

Packages should avoid accessing the shell which can reduce portability, and make it easier for malicious shell access to be introduced.

Take a deeper look at the dependency

Take a moment to review the security alert above. Review the linked package source code to understand the potential risk. Ensure the package is not malicious before proceeding. If you're unsure how to proceed, reach out to your security team or ask the Socket team for help at support [AT] socket [DOT] dev.

Remove the package

If you happen to install a dependency that Socket reports as Known Malware you should immediately remove it and select a different dependency. For other alert types, you may may wish to investigate alternative packages or consider if there are other ways to mitigate the specific risk posed by the dependency.

Mark a package as acceptable risk

To ignore an alert, reply with a comment starting with @SocketSecurity ignore followed by a space separated list of ecosystem/package-name@version specifiers. e.g. @SocketSecurity ignore npm/foo@1.0.0 or ignore all packages with @SocketSecurity ignore-all

• @SocketSecurity ignore npm/simple-git@3.25.0

[sonarcloud]

Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
0.0% Coverage on New Code (required ≥ 40%)

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[Cal-L]

Closing in favor of react-native-performance