On Thursday, September 12, 2013 7:47:02 PM UTC-7, Cedric Greevey wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Andy Fingerhut > <andy.fi...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote: > >> I have just added some discussion of this on ClojureDocs.org for the >> function clojure.core/subs, and references to that discussion for several >> other Clojure functions that I am pretty sure are affected, e.g. re-find, >> re-seq, re-matches, clojure.string/split, replace, replace-first >> > > We know with certainty that clojure.string/split is affected. Also, the > OP's question about how to use tooling to track down similar leaks in the > future does not appear to have been satisfactorily answered as of yet. >
cricket, cricket, cricket... ;) Is there really no working tooling for the jvm? The string thing bothers me less than the problem of seq heads. It is ridiculously easy to create a memory leak with a seq, and desperately hard to track one down. I would be surprised if most clojure apps were not leaking memory somewhere, in places that go unnoticed until a sufficiently large input fills the heap. I wonder if a static analysis approach could identify code that appears to retain a seq head to no effect. -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
