Hacker News Reader

That anonymous function is a literal, just like the number 50 (the next argument after it). In the same way the 50 doesn't get created each iteration, neither does the anonymous function.

View on HN

My tenuous understanding of the ECMAScript spec would suggest that a new execution context and associated activation object + scope chain is created each time that function is invoked. Since this is a closure, the execution context and associated objects have to wait to be garbage collected.

So you're going to see an increase in memory with each function call until the garbage collector kicks in.

So while the function definition is a literal, the execution most definitely has a cost associated with it.

The memory profile says otherwise, doesn't it? If you create a named function and call it like "setInterval(draw, 50)", the memory use stays constant.

Did you get that result on your machine? From all reports in that question the profile is the same regardless of the anonymous function.

Except it doesn't. At least, not when I try it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com