You better sit down for this: reviewing now. On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 8:51 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> ping. > > On 2010/10/14 19:46:03, fabiomfv wrote: > >> +1. >> > > there is the possibility of choosing incorrectly since we are not able >> > to > >> look at the parameter type 'passed in' (proposed fix 2 would work on >> > that > >> basis, but is a higher impact change). As Ray mentioned, the safe >> > workaround > >> is to provide a different name. >> > > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Ray Ryan <mailto:[email protected]> >> > wrote: > > > By providing a setter with a different name, I guess. An alternative >> > would > >> > be to provide a new annotation, but that still presumes that they >> > control > >> > the widget source, not much of a win. >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:11 PM, <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> How does the user override the heuristic if it chooses incorrectly? >> >> >> >> >> >> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/993801/show >> >> >> > >> > >> > > > > > http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/993801/show > -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
