The author of that library has plans to migrate to overlay types. We've got a change branch going on http://code.google.com/p/gwt-google-apis under changes/vinays/.
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-google-apis/source/browse/#svn/changes/vinays/gwt-google-maps-v3 On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Daniel Bell <daniel.r.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the feedback. The reason I'm not using the official Maps API is > that I need to use version 3 of the JavaScript API, which isn't supported by > the GWT Google APIs project yet. The more developed of the GWT Maps > Libraries (http://code.google.com/p/gwt-google-maps-v3/) uses JSIO for > everything, rather than overlay types, so I'm concerned about performance in > the case that lots (hundreds or so) of objects are being rendered on the > map. At the moment it's looking like I'll contribute some changes there. > Thanks again, > Daniel > > On 7 July 2010 03:20, Eric Ayers <zun...@google.com> wrote: >> >> Overlay types are the way to go. The gwt-maps API use jsio because it >> predates overlay types. >> >> On Jul 6, 2010 11:18 AM, "John Tamplin" <j...@google.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:08 AM, Daniel Bell <daniel.r.b...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> I have a question for you about Overlay Types and the JSIO library. >> >> I'm working on a GWT interface to the Google Maps JavaScript API, and >> >> am wondering about the difference in performance between the two >> >> approaches. >> >> With JSIO I've been using wrapper objects that each contain an >> >> instance of a JavaScriptObject being wrapped, and contain a reference >> >> to a singleton instance of the flyweight wrapper. My guess is that the >> >> performance would be better if I used Overlay Types instead, but I am >> >> just guessing. Do you know (roughly) what the difference in >> >> performance is between the two approaches? >> >> >> > >> > First question - why aren't you using the official GWT APIs for Maps >> > instead >> > of writing your own? http://code.google.com/p/gwt-google-apis/ If there >> > is >> > something you need that isn't included, why not contribute to that >> > rather >> > than create your own from scratch? >> > >> > Overlay types are a bit more efficient and don't require a generator >> > running >> > which makes DevMode faster, but I don't think there is a lot of >> > difference. >> > >> > -- >> > John A. Tamplin >> > Software Engineer (GWT), Google >> > >> > -- >> > http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors >> >> -- >> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors > > -- > http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -- Eric Z. Ayers Google Web Toolkit, Atlanta, GA USA -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
