I am perfectly happy with Java/JsInterop in its current state. Sure there are some things that could be improved, but what couldn't. BTW, I have never used the GWT widgets, so my case may be different. I tried TS, Angular, etc..., and have come back to GWT with JsInterop to deal with large projects. Porting a largish Angular/Typescript project back to GWT with JsInterop, I found several bugs, because Typescript gives the illusion of types and "type checking", while GWT does real type checking. Put me in the camp that does not care if J2CL ever comes out. I want fast compiles, especially in dev mode, anything that threatens that with a 2 step compile is of no interest to me. I am also not interested in anything that would compile differently in dev mode than in production mode in the interest of fast compiles, we have been down that road before with the legacy development mode, and when something worked in dev mode but not in prod mode, it was not fun to fix. Anyways, I am quite sure this does not belong in this group, so let's continue the discussion in the main GWT group
On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 4:48 AM, Ivan Markov <ivan.mar...@gmail.com> wrote: > This time I'll bite... > > J2CL has been - what? - two to three years in the making - yet, there is > nothing released to the public yet (aside from a preview to a few blessed > individuals). > > Before someone follows up again with the usual matra that "it is not > production ready yet and it will do more harm than good" or "somebody is > porting the GWT widgets to J2CL as without these J2CL would be unusable" > let's ask ourselves: *are these statements holding any ground anymore*? > > Here's a situation which is very likely not typical to just us: > We have to - like NOW - start replacing - in our app - all the dying GWT > widget-set/RPC legacy with a maintained and more contemporary toolkit > (React, Angular2, whatever). > > (And please let's not argue over whether the GWT widget-set is still an > option for any new development. For us it is not. Also let's not argue if > coding against JavaScript libs with the existing GWT compiler toolchain is > a viable option in the long term - it is obviously not.) > > The question: shall we scrap GWT altogether and rewrite in JS/TS? Or shall > we continue with Java/JSInterop? > > Now, please enlighten me how we can defend the option of continuing in > Java/JSInterop - even in front of ourselves - given that 3 years from the > initial announcement - J2CL is still just smoke and mirrors for almost all > Google outsiders? We can't play with it to gain some confidence that it > will work for us.. Also what happens if Google changes their mind and > decides not to release it - say - due to legal issues? We would be stuck > with an all-new Java/JSInterop code still bound to the dying compiler > toolchain of GWT. Not a situation anybody wants to end up with, I guess... > > > -- > 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 google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/b99a4589-68f8- > 47f0-a414-80468bb90d5a%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/b99a4589-68f8-47f0-a414-80468bb90d5a%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 google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CADS2qKuzjTbe52F_z67YjFb44A5Q755bjP6v1Uo6WXkUJp4_Hg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
