Ah, yes, I understand the larger issue(s) now. I wasn't thinking about all of the name-munging issues that would arise between separately compiled modules. Having been to DLL hell and back in my career, I have no interest in returning.
-Brett On Jul 7, 7:33 am, codesite-nore...@google.com wrote: > Comment by hbrucejohnson: > > @brett: What Ray said. Also, we don't want to create the web equivalent of > DLL Hell, which is a very easy situation to get into. Finally, and most > importantly, runtime modularity simply has a really high performance cost > because HTTP round-trips over the internet are inevitably slow and so we > strive to encourage architectures that avoid them. All that said, I think > there are a few things we'll do before long (e.g. making it easy to expose > JS-callable APIs from GWT modules, like Ray's gwt-exporter) could go a long > way toward providing some amount of dynamic pluggability without sacrficing > too much in the way of performance. > > For more > information:http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/wiki/CodeSplitting --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
