RUM-8112: Fix gradients not showing in compose

[jonathanmos]

What does this PR do?

A brief description of the change being made with this pull request.

Motivation

What inspired you to submit this pull request?

Additional Notes

Anything else we should know when reviewing?

Review checklist (to be filled by reviewers)

• Feature or bugfix MUST have appropriate tests (unit, integration, e2e)
• Make sure you discussed the feature or bugfix with the maintaining team in an Issue
• Make sure each commit and the PR mention the Issue number (cf the CONTRIBUTING doc)

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 74.59016% with 31 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 72.42%. Comparing base (6107f38) to head (fddf6f6).
⚠️ Report is 18 commits behind head on develop.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...eplay/compose/internal/utils/BackgroundResolver.kt	88.89%	4 Missing and 6 partials ⚠️
...onreplay/compose/internal/utils/ReflectionUtils.kt	25.00%	6 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
...ionreplay/compose/internal/utils/SemanticsUtils.kt	45.45%	2 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
...y/compose/internal/reflection/ComposeReflection.kt	37.50%	0 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️
...l/mappers/semantics/AbstractSemanticsNodeMapper.kt	0.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #3471      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    72.29%   72.42%   +0.12%     
===========================================
  Files          964      965       +1     
  Lines        35576    35632      +56     
  Branches      5926     5948      +22     
===========================================
+ Hits         25719    25803      +84     
+ Misses        8259     8175      -84     
- Partials      1598     1654      +56     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...l/mappers/semantics/AbstractSemanticsNodeMapper.kt	77.36% <0.00%> (ø)
...y/compose/internal/reflection/ComposeReflection.kt	36.96% <37.50%> (+36.96%)	⬆️
...ionreplay/compose/internal/utils/SemanticsUtils.kt	66.67% <45.45%> (-3.07%)	⬇️
...onreplay/compose/internal/utils/ReflectionUtils.kt	4.40% <25.00%> (+3.13%)	⬆️
...eplay/compose/internal/utils/BackgroundResolver.kt	88.89% <88.89%> (ø)

... and 34 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[jonathanmos]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 7a91816d84

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".

[0xnm]

We shouldn't do like this, ideally. Is there a possibility to inject the logger into the particular method calls where needed?

[satween]

Also note that it could be named sdk ( Datadog.getInstance("some name here") )

[0xnm]

same as above