top | item 17401557 (no title) woumn | 7 years ago That sounds like the developers messed up some Javascript references that are unable to be cleaned up to me. But interesting nonetheless. discuss order hn newest specialist|7 years ago Memory leaks can be hard to track down.After weeks of effort, a team mate finally figured out that a default noop function param, eg function blah( param = () => {} ), was never being gc’d. Wut?! bzbarsky|7 years ago Was it getting captured by a closure being returned from the function, with that closure never getting gced?But yes, in general tracking down leaks in JS is a huge pain... load replies (2)
specialist|7 years ago Memory leaks can be hard to track down.After weeks of effort, a team mate finally figured out that a default noop function param, eg function blah( param = () => {} ), was never being gc’d. Wut?! bzbarsky|7 years ago Was it getting captured by a closure being returned from the function, with that closure never getting gced?But yes, in general tracking down leaks in JS is a huge pain... load replies (2)
bzbarsky|7 years ago Was it getting captured by a closure being returned from the function, with that closure never getting gced?But yes, in general tracking down leaks in JS is a huge pain... load replies (2)
specialist|7 years ago
After weeks of effort, a team mate finally figured out that a default noop function param, eg function blah( param = () => {} ), was never being gc’d. Wut?!
bzbarsky|7 years ago
But yes, in general tracking down leaks in JS is a huge pain...