Hi, Should I modify my patch and repost it or do you go with the http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1386806/ option ?
Again I truely think that it's not necessary to add anything other than the simple AbstractAsyncActivity class (we may call it otherwise though). Antoine. 2011/3/25 <[email protected]> > This struck me as being more complicated than warranted. I took a crack > at it myself in http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1386806/, but I may > be making some bad assumptions. > > > > http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1383802/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/activity/shared/AbstractAsyncActivity.java > File user/src/com/google/gwt/activity/shared/AbstractAsyncActivity.java > (right): > > > http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1383802/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/activity/shared/AbstractAsyncActivity.java#newcode26 > user/src/com/google/gwt/activity/shared/AbstractAsyncActivity.java:26: * > onCancel. > These docs are a bit confusing. All Activities are async, but what > you're really talking about here is code splitting via GWT.runAsync() > > > http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1383802/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/activity/shared/AsyncActivityProvider.java > File user/src/com/google/gwt/activity/shared/AsyncActivityProvider.java > (right): > > > http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1383802/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/activity/shared/AsyncActivityProvider.java#newcode85 > user/src/com/google/gwt/activity/shared/AsyncActivityProvider.java:85: * > Transforms the given synchronous activity into an asynchronous one. > Again, "synchronous activity" isn't a good term. > > http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1383802/ > -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
