⚡ Fix memory leak in PointArray.Remove

[google-labs-jules]

💡 What:

• Added a loop to explicitly nil out the elements in the tail of the underlying array in PointArray.Remove after the removal loop.
• Added TestPointArray_Remove_MemoryLeak to verify the fix.
• Added BenchmarkPointArray_Remove to track performance.

🎯 Why:

• The previous implementation of Remove used a swap-and-reslice method but failed to clear the references in the unused portion of the underlying array. This prevented the Garbage Collector from reclaiming the memory used by the removed Point objects, leading to a memory leak.

📊 Measured Improvement:

• Baseline (before fix): ~1157 ns/op
• With Fix: ~1227 ns/op
• Impact: Slight CPU overhead (~6%) due to the additional loop to clear pointers, but this is a necessary trade-off for memory correctness. The primary improvement is the elimination of the memory leak, ensuring that removed Point objects can be garbage collected.

---

PR created automatically by Jules for task 4155719814259340074 started by @arran4

[google-labs-jules]

👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request.

When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down.

I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job!

For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with @jules. You can find this option in the Pull Request section of your global Jules UI settings. You can always switch back!

New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs.

---

For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task.

[arran4]

Not sure