It's not all as black and white as that article suggests. Whilst the user should be setting to null (or their JS framework library), it is ultimately the responsibility of the browser to prevent memory leaks from occuring.
Some may point to Dojo and laugh at the memory leakage in their mail client, and they'd be right to. It is really quite bad that the library has so many loose ends, but again, Firefox should ultimately fix these issues. IE does this, and does it well, taking the necessity to explicity nullify out of the heads of developers. Why the Mozilla Foundation has waited so long to plug these particular leaks is unknown to me, but while these problems exists, the browser is still open to some big risks from JavaScript. By the way, if anyone (who does software dev) has actually looked at Firefox's JS code, they'll laugh. It's a real mess. Also, why is this thread specifically for Brandon Aaron? I mean, this is a mailing list, and you can email Brandon directly. If it's for everyone else, then wouldn't 'Firefox still has multiple memory leaks, looky looky' be a better title. Rey Bango-2 wrote: > > Hey Brandon, > > Looks like you hit it right on the head with your new event unloader: > > http://www.jackslocum.com/yui/2006/10/02/3-easy-steps-to-avoid-javascript-memory-leaks/ > > Check out point #2. > > Rey... > > _______________________________________________ > jQuery mailing list > discuss@jquery.com > http://jquery.com/discuss/ > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/For-Brandon-Aaron-tf2372925.html#a6617116 Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
