Martin, For really simple example you can see here:
http://itsp.typepad.com/voip/2009/07/gwt-implementing-rpc-command-pattern-on-server.html At the end, you will need to add some more code, but you can see how the pattern works (it helped me!) Herme On Jul 5, 10:16 am, martinhansen <martin.hanse...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Hello David, > > I've read your source code and your example. It is very interesting. > But although it's short and simple, I still don't understand it. > Especially "GIN" and "GUICE" confuses me a lot. Can I use your example > without these technologies? > > Does anyone know a really simple example? The example in Ray's sheet > is interesting and simple, but incomplete. Where does the actual > action take place in his example, let's say, querying some contact > details from a remote data base? I think this important part is > missing. > The ContactService defines a method called "execute", but where is > this method implemented? Is it implemented automatically by some > mechanism? If yes, how is it done? Is "execute" the only method in the > interface I ever need, e.g. some kind of place holder? > > Any help would be greatly appreciated. > > On 5 Jul., 08:17, David Peterson <da...@randombits.org> wrote: > > > > > Hi Nathan, > > > On Jul 5, 2:15 am, Nathan Wells <nwwe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I updated my project to only use the two interfaces as suggested by > > > David. Instead of using actionhandlers and registering them, I created > > > an annotation for the IRemoteProcedureCall implementations that > > > contains the canonical class name of the IProcedure that is to be run > > > on the server. > > > As you say, one of the downsides of linking the handler to the > > concrete implementation is that there may be issues with the GWT > > compiler. That said, in general it seems to mostly ignore attributes, > > so it may not be an issue. > > > The other downside for me is that it ties the action interface to a > > specific implementation. This makes it more difficult to write mocks > > for tests, etc. Having them configured purely on the server-side means > > you can replace them with whatever you like on in test scenarios. Or, > > if you want to provide alternate implementations (eg. JDO vs > > Hibernate), you can have both in your app and just switch between them > > by changing your DI configuration. > > > The downside of my method is that you may forget to actually implement > > the handler. Of course, this will generally show up pretty quickly > > when you try to actually use it. And I guess it's still quite easy to > > forget to supply the annotation anyway... > > > David --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to Google-Web-Toolkit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
