Actually, incubator might be a great place for them (as well as the submission for issue #1727).
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Folke Behrens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi > > With all the conversions to JSOs/overlay types going on I was > wondering if it makes sense to provide implementions of the core > JavaScript objects as well. I've already submitted RegExp (issue > 1727)? (Granted, Math and Date are pretty similar to their Java > siblings but having them around too only hurts compile-time and makes > the JSO collection complete.) > > GWT's core module has several lightweight JSOs for arrays, why not > take it further and provide classes for most of JavaScript's global > objects, and instead of using big JSNI methods in java.* classes we > use the JSOs and rewrite the methods completely in Java. There's a lot > of API compatibility code written inside JSNI methods that should > better be written in real Java. Also, private helper methods like > java.lang.Math.round0() could be moved to JSMath.round(). > > Well, I think this extra layer will lead to smaller and faster > applications. People coming from other JavaScript frameworks will feel > more comfortable if they can slice() and splice() their arrays right > away. > > The attached ZIP contains JSRegExp and JSArray<E>. Is this incubator > material? (They're far from finished.) > > Folke > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
