On Monday, 16 November 2015 12:34:51 UTC, Thomas Broyer wrote: > > > > On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 11:29:14 AM UTC+1, Robert Stone wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sunday, 15 November 2015 15:37:29 UTC, Stephen Haberman wrote: >>> >>> >>> My worry about "just pick a mainstream JS framework and use it via >>> JSInterop" is that if you're a) coupled to a JS environment for unit >>> testing and b) interfacing with a framework that is inherently >>> dynamic/untyped, what's the benefit of using GWT in the first place? >>> >> >> >> And this for me sums up GWTs main issues going forward. The benefit >> before was that existing Java devs could use GWT to work on all the layers >> of an application. GWT 3 will force (not a bad thing) Java devs to use >> JavaScript for their views and will also force them to deal with >> integrating JS and Java code. >> > > I think Vaadin and Julien Dramaix showed during the last months how you > can use GWT to create Web Components (through Polymer), so no J2CL or GWT 3 > won't "force Java devs to use JavaScript for their views". > As for "forc[ing] them to deal with integrating JS and Java code", it > shouldn't be much different from the current situation dealing with Element > and NativeEvent (com.google.gwt.dom.*), Storage, Geolocation, etc. and > Elemental 2 (to be released shortly after 2.8 AFAIK) should help bridging > this gap. >
Yes and I agree, but taking this approach doesn't truly isolate the Java devs from needing to know JavaScript as GWT/JsInterop is providing a very thin wrapper over the JS framework of choice. Someone has to put that wrapper in place be it a 3rd party or someone in the team and that someone really does have to understand the underlying JS framework. At the end of the day, the Java devs will benefit from having more of an understanding of JS/HTML than they did in 'pure' GWT days. And again, I'm not saying this is a bad thing :) > > >> At this point, you have to ask 'Why bother with Java/GWT at all' - switch >> the full application to pure JS. >> > > If you have the luxury to "switch the full application" to another stack > (i.e. "big rewrite") *and* you have devs whose JS skills are comparable > to their (or the other team's) Java skills, then why not? > I'm not talking about a re-write here, I'm talking about new projects. For new projects, I can't see a compelling reason for picking GWT, if the devs are going to have to understand JS to use GWT then it is better to invest up front time in getting them familiar enough with JS to use it for the whole project. This is the decision we have taken in my organisation. > >> For existing large projects, switching to GWT 3 is almost a non-starter >> as there will be far too much existing view code to convert over so they >> will have to stick with the GWT 2 stream and hope that it remains well >> supported. This is the situation my company face with one of our products. >> >> So GWT 3 is not ideal for new projects and doesn't help with existing >> projects. Where is it's market? >> > > I think Google is increasingly building "hybrid apps" where they want/need > to share "business code" between several platforms rather than rewrite the > same thing in 3 languages: server, web client, android, and iOS. Server and > Android can be coded right in Java, GWT will bring the shared Java code to > the web client (where the UI could be written in JS, as is the case for > “Inbox by Gmail” or Google Spreadsheets), and J2ObjC will bring that code > to iOS (that's actually exactly the pitch in the J2ObjC homepage > introduction: http://j2objc.org/). > So GWT becomes more about "sharing/integrating Java with JS" than "using > Java instead of JS". > > But keep in mind that there still are apps at Google that use widgets > (Google Groups, where I'm writing this, to begin with), and Google likely > won't maintain J2CL and the GWT compiler in parallel (at least not for > long) so they'll have to find a migration path for their apps: either > rewrite their UI in JS (Closure), or make widgets J2CL-compatible, or > something in between (rewrite the UI without widgets, but still in Java, > using Web Components or some new widgets library). > True, but I would be amazed if Google were to start any new projects using GWT 3. Everything I heard at GWT Create and everything I have seen since has convinced me that they are interested in using J2CL/J2ObjC but nothing more than that. -- 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/9f719d2a-338f-4b0a-b451-5f95e8af410e%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
