`react-markdown@9.0.3` causes a significant increase in memory usage

[noahwaldner]

Initial checklist

• I read the support docs
• I read the contributing guide
• I agree to follow the code of conduct
• I searched issues and discussions and couldn’t find anything (or linked relevant results below)

Affected package

react-markdown@9.0.3

Steps to reproduce

1. Use react-markdown in a project
2. Run a typecheck with the --generateTrace option
3. Analyze the trace with @typescript/analyze-trace

Check file .../markdown.tsx (3388ms)
└─ Check deferred node from (line X, char X) to (line X, char X) (3341ms)
   └─ Compare types 1971 and 1260 (3331ms)
      └─ Compare types 1971 and 1247 (3327ms)
         └─ Compare types 338 and 1946 (3327ms)
            └─ Compare types 336 and 1261 (3327ms)

Actual behavior

After upgrading react-markdown, TypeScript compilation shows significantly increased memory usage and type checking time. The TypeScript trace shows extremely long type comparison times (3300+ ms) when processing files that import react-markdown.

This appears to be related to the recent change from @typedef to @import in the type definitions.

Previously @typedef {import('hast').Element} Element was handled as a simpler JSDoc annotation.

@import {Element} from 'hast' forces TypeScript to:

• Load and process full type definitions from each imported package
• Maintain more complex type relationships in memory
• Perform deeper type analysis during comparisons

The change from JSDoc annotations (@typedef) to TypeScript imports (@import) represents an implementation change that affects build performance for consumers.
Such changes should ideally be released as a minor version bump rather than a patch version, since patch versions should only contain backwards compatible bug fixes.

Expected behavior

TypeScript should compile with similar resource usage and performance as previous versions.

Runtime

node@22.13.1

Package manager

pnpm@9.15.4

Operating system

macOS Sequoia 15.1.2

Build and bundle tools

No response

[wooorm]

Sounds like an issue with TypeScript? Why not report it there?

[noahwaldner]

The performance regression appears to be due to how the type relationships are being constructed, rather than a TypeScript issue itself.

In the original implementation:

 /** @typedef {import('hast').Root} Root */
/** @typedef {import('unist-util-visit').BuildVisitor<Root>} Visitor */

/** @type {Visitor} */
function transform(node, index, parent) {

The complex type relationship between BuildVisitor and Root is resolved once at the typedef level.

In the new implementation:

/** @import {BuildVisitor} from 'unist-util-visit' */
/** @import {Root} from 'hast' */

/** @type {BuildVisitor<Root>} */
function transform(node, index, parent) {

TypeScript needs to resolve and compare these types each time the function used/referenced. This means that everytime, it needs to:

• Resolve the imported BuildVisitor type
• Resolve the imported Root type
• Construct the generic type BuildVisitor
• Compare this constructed type with where it's being used

This leads to the deep type comparison traces we're seeing:

CopyCompare types 1971 and 1260 (3331ms)
└─ Compare types 1971 and 1247 (3327ms)
   └─ Compare types 338 and 1946 (3327ms)
      └─ Compare types 336 and 1261 (3327ms)

[remcohaszing]

Because of the aa5933b, the emitted type definitions no longer contain BuildVisitor. I haven’t investigated deeply, but this can’t be the cause.

$ grep BuildVisitor -r node_modules/react-markdown 
node_modules/react-markdown/lib/index.js: * @import {BuildVisitor} from 'unist-util-visit'
node_modules/react-markdown/lib/index.js:  /** @type {BuildVisitor<Root>} */
$ npm ls react-markdown
└── react-markdown@9.0.3

[wooorm]

This means that everytime, it needs to:

I don’t think that this happens; you are looking at JS but your TS is not reading JS. Like remco shows, you do not get the BuildVisitor type

[wooorm]

Closing, there is no reproduction, it is very vague what this is, whether something needs to or can be changed here.

[github-actions]

Hi! This was closed. Team: If this was fixed, please add phase/solved. Otherwise, please add one of the no/* labels.