Hi,

FWIW, I don't think this is a bug in Prototype.  Prototype keeps track
of the event handlers it hooks up so it can unhook them on page unload
to work around memory leaks in IE.  (This also lets it provide the new
stopObserving functionality in release 1.6 where you don't have to
specify the handler to unhook things.)  This means that it has to use
a small bit of memory to track the handlers.  That's not a *leak*, I
wouldn't say, but a *use* of memory.

If you remove an element from the DOM (directly or by removing its
ancestor), I think it's incumbent on your application logic to remove
any handlers you've registered for it as well.  Your function that
does this with a select("*") is obviously one way to do that, but
ideally there'd be something more finely-grained that app logic could
handle.  Personally, I wouldn't want to see the select("*") thing
added to Prototype (for instance, in the Element.update method),
because I don't want that overhead every time I remove an element if I
know I don't have any handlers registered on it.

Someday we may get access to the DOM event
DOMNodeRemovedFromDocument[1].  Now that would be nice, because it
would give us notification of an element being removed and let us
release any memory we have associated with it.  (I'm not sure I'd want
Prototype to do it for me even then, but I'll make that call when/if
we get the event.)

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-DOM-Level-2-Events-20001113/

If it's very complicated in your app to know which elements within the
element being replaced are being watched, you might look at event
delegation instead, which involves fewer handlers placed at a higher
(e.g., container) level.

FWIW,
--
T.J. Crowder
tj / crowder software / com


On Oct 30, 7:57 am, "Yee Keat Phuah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Was trying to cut the memory leak reported with this tool 
> ->http://home.wanadoo.nl/jsrosman/.
>
> Found out that there are some memory leaks in prototype's
> Event.observe, only when the element that is observed is not within
> the document DOM, this might happen when
> 1. I have not attached the element into the DOM, or that
> 2. I have removeChild or replaceChild the element that was observed
> on. (this is what I encountered in my project)
>
> I see this as a leak in prototype because using the attachEvent
> (button 2 in the test page) equivalent does not present the same leak.
>
> Attaching the element into the document (button 3 in the test page)
> also does not present the same leak.
>
> I have found that the fix from this thread 
> ->http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core/browse_thread/thread/c2...
> solves the problem, contrary to the original poster who reported it
> only for IE6, my test program shows that the leak happens for IE7 as
> well.
>
> For my project, instead of using the straight forward:
> parent.replaceChild(newnode, oldnode);
>
> I have to do this instead:
> $(oldnode).select("*").each(function(e) {
>   $(e).stopObserving();});
>
> parent.replaceChild(newnode, oldnode);
>
> That's quite a lot of work.
>
> Hope to see this fixed in 1.6.1 if not 1.6.0.
>
> Cheers,
> Phuah  Yee Keat
>
>  testobserve.html
> 2KViewDownload
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to