[BartekObudzinski]

Explanation of Change

SVGDefinitionsProvider was rendering the hidden <svg><defs> element and the entire app children in a single component. Because the provider sits near the root and wraps the whole app, every root re-render rebuilt the <defs> subtree, including the two LinearGradientEmptyStateBackground gradients. Profiler showed those gradients re-rendering on every commit across the app.

This change extracts the <svg><defs> markup into a separate SVGDefinitions component with no props. React Compiler memoizes it automatically, so the gradients render once and are skipped on subsequent commits while SVGDefinitionsProvider continues to wrap children as before.

Performance impact: measured over 5 runs, average commit time dropped from ~612ms to ~527ms (about 14% improvement). LinearGradientEmptyStateBackground no longer re-renders on every commit.

Fixed Issues

$ #99844
PROPOSAL:

Tests

1. Open the app and navigate between several screens.
2. Verify that no JS console errors appear.
3. Verify that empty-state background gradients still render correctly in both light and dark themes.

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

Same as tests.

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 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 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)
• 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)
• 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.
• 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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/components/SVGDefinitionsProvider/index.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 1012 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@DylanDylann 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]

[BartekObudzinski]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Chef's kiss.

Reviewed commit: 192d04631b

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[DylanDylann]

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 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)
• 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)
• 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.
• 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

Main Branch

Screen.Recording.2026-09-02.at.14.13.35.mov

Current Branch

Screen.Recording.2026-09-02.at.14.18.24.mov

[DylanDylann]

@BartekObudzinski Hmmm, I think old code was already memoized by React Compiler automatically??? But just to be sure, could you tell me how you verified the performance impact?

Performance impact: measured over 5 runs, average commit time dropped from ~612ms to ~527ms (about 14% improvement). LinearGradientEmptyStateBackground no longer re-renders on every commit.

[BartekObudzinski]

I run devtools profiler record and measure sentry span on navigate to ManualNavigateToInboxTab flow @DylanDylann

[DylanDylann]

@BartekObudzinski This is the step I used for testing

1. Npm run web
2. Clear the cache
3. Navigate to Home Page
4. Click on Inbox Tab
5. Check [Sentry][ManualNavigateToInboxTab] Ending span Log on the console

I tried these steps on both the main branch and the current PR branch (already merged the latest main), but unfortunately I don't see any significant improvement

Main Branch

Screen.Recording.2026-09-02.at.14.13.35.mov

Current Branch

Screen.Recording.2026-09-02.at.14.18.24.mov

[BartekObudzinski]

Right, it’s not a big perf win. It’s more of a cleanup, it cuts the noise in profiler recordings and shaves a bit off render time @DylanDylann

[github-actions]

🚧 JS00001 has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

[OSBotify]

✋ 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]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #99669.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-d693503-f72dc07-582fa7224101ea96b94a32bf38caf0db8948f418/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-d693503-f72dc07-c0ebe373d9f94ab2c5333978ae28eedfad913ac6/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://99669.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/JS00001 in version: 9.4.69-0 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

[MelvinBot]

🤖 No help site changes required. I did not create a docs PR.

Why: This PR is an internal React rendering optimization with no user-facing change. It moves the hidden <svg><defs> markup out of SVGDefinitionsProvider into a props-less SVGDefinitions component so React Compiler can memoize it. The rendered output is byte-for-byte identical — same <svg>, same <defs>, same two LinearGradientEmptyStateBackground gradients.

Nothing in the diff adds, removes, or renames a feature, tab, setting, label, or button, so there is no behavior for App/docs/articles to describe differently.

What I checked

• Diff scope: one file, src/components/SVGDefinitionsProvider/index.tsx (+20/−9). The <svg> element, its aria-hidden attribute, its inline styles, and both gradient children are unchanged — only their enclosing component boundary moved.
• Linked issue [Due for payment 2026-09-10] [NoQA] prevent SVG definitions from re-rendering on every commit #99844 frames this purely as a commit-time improvement (~612ms → ~527ms average), not a product change.
• Help site search: no article under App/docs/articles mentions SVG definitions, gradients, or empty-state backgrounds. These are presentation internals the help site has never documented.
• QA framing: the PR is titled [NoQA] and its test steps only ask a reviewer to confirm gradients still render as before — a no-regression check, not new behavior.

Help site updates are warranted when a change alters what someone sees or does in the product. This one deliberately keeps that identical, so the existing articles remain accurate as written.

@BartekObudzinski, please confirm you agree no help site update is needed here. If you believe some user-facing behavior did change that I missed, reply with the detail and I will draft the docs PR.

---

view run

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/francoisl in version: 9.4.69-1 🚀

platform	result
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	success ✅

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

• Android