Generally, looks good, but wouldn't mind hearing your comments to my questions before the submit.
https://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1646803/diff/1/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java File user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java (right): https://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1646803/diff/1/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java#newcode365 user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java:365: new IdentityHashMap<BaseProxy, Resolution>(); Looks good, but I must say that I dont' quite understand how/why this fixes the problem. Can you point out how the code execution in this class would have resulted in a breakage with a HashMap vs. an IdentityHashMap? https://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1646803/diff/1/user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/RequestFactoryTest.java File user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/RequestFactoryTest.java (right): https://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1646803/diff/1/user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/RequestFactoryTest.java#newcode587 user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/RequestFactoryTest.java:587: simpleFooRequest().returnValueProxies().with("simpleFoo.fooField").fire(new Receiver<List<SimpleValueProxy>>() { Sorry if this is naive question, but since the returnValueProxies method implementation always fills in all of the properties (such as fooField), doesn't the with("simpleFoo.fooField") become redundant? Based on the implementation of returnValueProxies(), it seems that simpleFoo.fooField will always be filled in, regardless of whether or not you use the 'with' statement. https://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1646803/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
