> > BTW, with Core, I mean literally com.google.gwt.core.Core (which includes > the java.lang.emul as well) and we are not really dropping support; just > changing the defaults when useragent is not available. > Currently IE8 was good enough to get the benefit I was looking for (i.e > Object.create(null)) but I think we can simply bump up the minimum version > to IE10 if there are other good benefits. I think it is fair to require > UserAgent dependency for anything older. >
And whats the general usefulness of such a change? Wouldn't any app inherit UserAgent anyways because it gets inherited by basic things like DOM.gwt.xml? I have a hard time imagining an "app" that gets compiled to JS but only depends on Core and does not indirectly pull in UserAgent. And if I write a library that only inherits Core how does separate compilation behave if that library is not a fileset and the app that uses the library has inherited UserAgent? -- J. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Contributors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/02a508a8-33b4-4cdd-a9d9-e1037d070566%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
