Aktywne Wpisy
![RitmoXL](https://wykop.pl/cdn/c0834752/cfabba97fd8b6dea59939479eb1f1af03f094a46391c8456dda9c03fcad36c87,q60.png)
RitmoXL +809
#nieruchomosci #kredythipoteczny #kredyt2procent upośledzone wykopki, gdy usłyszą "podatek katastralny"
![jan-kowalski-nieudany-eksperyment - #nieruchomosci #kredythipoteczny #kredyt2procent ...](https://wykop.pl/cdn/c3201142/30ba22016acd9d02ea276afb033bdb8a7bc1bcd8d38fe45fa3d9db9fa4deb3ee,w150.jpg)
źródło: comment_1606990204nSSCFxVjeGJtOU1pZ4qhyV
PobierzSkopiuj link
Skopiuj linkźródło: comment_1606990204nSSCFxVjeGJtOU1pZ4qhyV
PobierzWykop.pl
Źródło: https://blog.sessionstack.com/how-javascript-works-memory-management-how-to-handle-4-common-memory-leaks-3f28b94cfbec
Po 1. Pkt 3. O co mirki chodzi w tym zdaniu: The thing to remember is that once a scope for closures is created for closures in the same parent scope, the scope is shared.
i po 2. W pkt. 4: If you store a reference to each DOM row in a dictionary or an array, there will be two references to the same DOM element: one in the DOM tree and another in the dictionary. If you decide to get rid of these rows, you need to remember to make both references unreachable.
Rozumiem usuwanie w JS ale, co ma na myśli "you need to remember to make both references unreachable."