It would be really helpful if you could isolate your problem to a small example.
On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Roberto Lublinerman <[email protected]> wrote: > I did not use pretty style because I thought that this flag produces >> different result, I tested now and looks like the output is the same, but, >> I'm pretty sure that some flags changes this issues, optimize is obvious >> that fixes the problem, but I think that namespace=package also changes the >> result. >> > > In a nutshell there are optimizations on the Java AST and those are not > affected at all by -style or -Xnamespace. Optimizations that are related to > types, instantiability, devirtualization, etc, are done in the Java AST. > > Some optimizations in that JavaScriptAST might be affected by -style (like > DuplicateFunctionRemoval) but those I think they are mostly off. I don't > think -Xnamespace has any impact on optimizations. > > That said, if you are using JsInterop, and you have a type that is never > new'ed in Java, the compiler infers that is not instantiable and assumes it > is always null and optimizes accordingly. Types originating from JavaScript > need to be marked as JsType so that the compiler is aware and does not > assume they are null. > > > -- 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/CAC7T7g%3DO7iy7S5Sha3ZsATY-aFeckFwFH9mOuJBGMOerPqMvsg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
