Oh, I definitely understand the motivation for hunting down this kind of
problem, and I appreciate your efforts. I run a number of single-page
Ur/Web apps in production. The fact that no one is complaining about
them provides some evidence that this isn't a deadly problem in practice.
On 08/28/2016 08:18 PM, Saulo Araujo wrote:
Hi Adam,
Memory leaks in the JavaScript runtime like these are not important in
classical web applications because the browser moves to a new page
very frequently, thus freeing all memory that the previous page has
allocated. However, In single-page applications
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-page_application), the browser
loads just one page, which makes the absence of memory leaks in the
JavaScript runtime crucial. Maybe most of the applications that are in
production are of the classical kind. This would explain why there are
no complaints about memory leaks in the JavaScript runtime. As I am
developing a single-page application
(https://github.com/saulo2/timesheet-ur), this is an important matter
to me. Therefore, I am willing to contribute by hunting those leaks
and suggesting fixes. Also, I believe that more and more single-page
applications will be developed with Ur/Web rather than classical ones.
Sincerely,
Saulo
On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Adam Chlipala <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 08/24/2016 03:02 PM, Saulo Araujo wrote:
I am happy to say that your patch also fixes the memory leak.
OK, great.
I believe there is another memory leak in the JavaScript
runtime (see the end of the previous message). I am gonna look
into it.
I'll appreciate any help finding more memory leaks, though in the
foreseeable future I probably won't be spending time tracking them
down. There don't seem to have been any complaints yet about
memory leaks in connection to production applications.
_______________________________________________
Ur mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.impredicative.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ur
