On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 7:50 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To be honest, I wish we would start creating larger .gwt.xml files and > make each one that exists inheritable.
I agree. It was a rookie decision we made early on to over-emphasize fine-grained module reuse, and, like C header files, nobody has enough discipline (or incentive) to ensure they are all truly independently inheritable. > Doing that would mean that I > would get rid of UserAgent.gwt.xml altogether and move its contents into > dom.DOM.gwt.xml. (or either create useragent.UserAgent.gwt.xml) The reason not to do this would be if there are other important use cases of modules that switch on User Agent but don't use DOM. I can only think of one right now: StringBuidler in 1.6 is the first place where the JRE can be sensitive to user agent. And you *might* in theory want to do sheer computation in GWT without touching the DOM (e.g. in a Gears worker thread). If we're going to make this kind of change, perhaps we should debate the merits of useragent.UserAgent to be darn sure it isn't the better option. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
