Looked at the intradiff, looks OK. Will still test tomorrow to make sure.
Would be best to have unit-tests though, particularly for cases we *want* to fail! See http://blog.xebia.com/2009/07/testing-annotation-processors/ (I'd be more than OK to see unit tests being added as a subsequent patch though ;-) ) http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1467804/diff/1028/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java File user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1467804/diff/1028/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java#newcode111 user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java:111: // Here, t would be NONE or PACKAGE, neither of which make sense s/t/x/ http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1467804/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
