Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #27706
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
| Subject | Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? |
| Date | 2015-05-17 08:01 +0200 |
| Organization | PointedEars Software (PES) |
| Message-ID | <1975681.PYLPBkoTqA@PointedEars.de> (permalink) |
| References | <mj7odj$ejr$1@dont-email.me> <GC-20150516175759@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <2602320.PcnAOMWr9L@PointedEars.de> <mj8pgm$nev$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
Joao Rodrigues wrote: > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >> Stefan Ram wrote: >>> - avoid circular references between JavaScript objects and DOM objects >>> - avoid using closure variables in event handlers >>> - avoid using inline event handlers (onclick='f()') >>> - avoid using expando properties >>> - nullify expando properties and DOM references when not needed anymore >> >> The IE memory leak issue has been resolved as of IE 9, so given the >> target environments none of this is necessary anymore. Therefore, the >> programming language to which these measures applied, was JScript, not >> JavaScript, and only the MSHTML DOM, not all DOMs. > > Even though newer versions of modern browsers seem to have solved the > memory leak problems of yore, this issue may arise again because of the > single-page applications, for one, JS animations without properly > clearing timers. That is a separate issue. Yes, one should clear one?s timers. > So, we have one more reason to use CSS animations instead of JS > animations. True, but /non sequitur/. > There is a good article by Addy Osmani teaching how to chase leaks with > Chrome DevTools [2]. > > [2] > <http://addyosmani.com/blog/taming-the-unicorn-easing-javascript-memory-> profiling-in-devtools/> Your research is lacking depth. This article was published on 2013-04-11, around the time that Chrome 26 was released, which used WebKit as layout engine. The current stable Chrome version is 42 and uses a different layout engine, Blink. -- PointedEars FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/> Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix> Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? "Leonardo Azpurua" <leonardo@exmvps.org> - 2015-05-16 11:14 -0430
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-05-16 17:44 +0200
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? "Leonardo Azpurua" <leonardo@exmvps.org> - 2015-05-16 11:32 -0430
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-05-16 18:06 +0200
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? "Leonardo Azpurua" <leonardo@exmvps.org> - 2015-05-16 11:42 -0430
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-05-16 18:12 +0200
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-05-16 18:09 +0200
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2015-05-16 22:05 -0300
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-05-17 08:01 +0200
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2015-05-17 13:29 -0300
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-05-17 19:06 +0200
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-05-17 11:53 +0200
Re: Is it necessary to explicitly destroy elements? Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2015-05-17 13:20 -0300
csiph-web