Inline with what others asked; I think it is best to start with emulating an existing established API instead of introducing a new proprietary API - assuming they could be emulated with a reasonable performance.
On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Thomas Broyer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Monday, December 11, 2017 at 10:44:07 PM UTC+1, Slava Pankov wrote: >> >> I think it's better to replicate GSON like API on client side. Another >> option is doing better version of RestyGWT without GWT.create() >> > > Do you mean GSON's JsonElement API, or mapping to POJOs? > If the latter, then it's out of scope. > (I'm not saying it's not an interesting goal, it's just not the one I'm > pursuing here) > > -- > 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/12c77fe4-0509- > 46e3-b1d3-bdcdbe8040fb%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/12c77fe4-0509-46e3-b1d3-bdcdbe8040fb%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- 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/CAN%3DyUA2TR6t%2BgwjCojPg0GYy0o88zvsxqiO5BQ7uNER10cGtfw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
