On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Benjamin Lerman<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  Hi,
>
>> As for the question on adding another permutations... I think that
>> adding an ie7 permutation might be not necesarry. I posted a small
>> example on how I handle ie6/7(or 8 in ie7 mode) in my application...
>> it just means a small extra indirection but the cost is very low. It's
>> not like we are creating ImageBundles in a tight loop in our
>> applications (that is a bit against the whole idea of using them in
>> the first place).
>
>  Your remark just made me think to something.
>
>  The problem with extra permutations is mainly compile time.
>
>  When 2 permutations are very close to one another (a lot of deferred
> binding will lead to the same implementation for the 2 permutations),
> dynamic selection through indirection might not be that costly in
> performance. There is also a loss because of some optimization that will
> not take place, but one will have to accept that.
>
>  Then GWT could have an option to say that such and such permutation
> must be separated at runtime instead of compile time. That will allow
> the compilation to be as quick as now, but the designers will still be
> able to use the deferred binding mechanism to handle ie6/ie7 (for
> example).
>
>  Moreover, one can imagine an option to have all permutations separated
> at runtime for speeding up the compilation in development mode.
>
>  Did I miss something obvious?

Sounds like an interesting proposition, but is it really needed: I
tend to limit the number of permutations in development. I'm not
running multiple browsers at the same time.

David

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to