If any work is going to be done in consideration to 4052, it's probably
worth keeping
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=4053 in mind,
as they're likely related.
- Amir

On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 11:49 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> LGTM
>
> I'm not sure if it's worth the bother of trying to share this with
> UiBinder land. The interesting stuff is all shared already, via
> GenerateCssAst. (Maybe that'll be less true when we get around to
> addressing
> http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=4052, but
> I'm not ready to deal with that yet.)
>
> Questions, none of which gate committing
>
> 1) Do you need a plan to share this with Keith, or is he in the same
> boat I am: GenerateCssAst is share enough?
>
> 2) Either way, seems like you and Keith should be consistent on
> generated names. Perhaps if you had a java api that accepted an object
> in charge of name strategy, which Keith could also use in his code if he
> doesn't want your full generator? Could pave the way to dealing with
> 4052, too.
>
> 3) How are people going to find this? Seems like you want to mention it
> in the JavaDoc for CssResource at the very least.
>
> 4) Should you make the "this was generated" message a bit scarier? If
> you expect people to re-run this, we should scare them away from editing
> the java. And if they're not going to re-run it, they can take away the
> scarey bits.
>
>
> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/72808/diff/1/2
> File user/src/com/google/gwt/resources/css/InterfaceGenerator.java
> (right):
>
> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/72808/diff/1/2#newcode220
> Line 220: new URL[] {inputFile.toURL()});
> Worth changing the sig of GenerateCssAst.exec to (TreeLogger, URL...
> urls)?
>
> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/72808
>
> >
>

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

Reply via email to