I fully agree. Based on my experience, I'd suggest, for IE, to set the minimum supported version at IE11.
Il giorno venerdì 12 giugno 2020 17:48:48 UTC+2, Colin Alworth ha scritto: > > Agreed that this fix only requires dropping IE8, but I'm suggesting that > we go a bit further and either a) also drop other dead browsers, or b) have > a plan/timeline for when we can drop those browsers - at least officially. > We might still leave in support for them (as we did for IE6 for some > years), but require that projects go out of their way to enable that > support. > > -- > Colin Alworth > [email protected] <javascript:> > > > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020, at 9:49 AM, stockiNail wrote: > > Some frameworks can support IE8 polyfilling the application. In my opinion > the IE 8 support could be dropped. > > Don't forget that the proposal (the* Object.defineProperty()*usage) is > available from IE9, therefore we are not saying that we raise the GWT > requirement to IE11 or Edge, but only 1 version up. > > Il giorno venerdì 12 giugno 2020 16:32:24 UTC+2, Vegegoku ha scritto: > > Most of our cliensts dropped support for ancient IEs, and we now only > support IE11 and edge. > > On Thursday, June 11, 2020 at 10:18:18 PM UTC+3, Colin Alworth wrote: > > Since the existing code is very similar to J2CL's code, it seems like a > reasonable change, provided it is indeed safe to drop support for IE8. At a > glance, I'm having trouble finding a recent statement describing whether or > not IE8 (and 9, 10) ought to be supported - since GWT is often used for > large long-lived applications, it can sometimes make sense to provide > support for browsers that might be officially unsupported, but still either > have a wide install base or where some other "extended support" is still > available. > > For example, from > https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/faq/internet-explorer-microsoft-edge, > > it appears that while IE8 and IE10 are no longer supported, IE9 is still > supported in some supported operating systems as the most recent browser. > However, there is still the note "To continue receiving IE 8 updates after > January 12, 2016, please contact your Microsoft Account Team.", suggesting > it is still possible to get IE8 support. > > This is contradicted somewhat by > https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/deployedge/microsoft-edge-supported-operating-systems, > > which says that the two OS versions (Win Server 2008 IA64 and SP2) which > support IE9 are no longer supported, suggesting that aside from some > specialized support contract, IE8, IE9, and IE10 should be considered dead. > > On Thursday, June 11, 2020 at 1:08:48 PM UTC-5, stockiNail wrote: > > Hi all, > > I was facing an annoying issue about the hashcode *$N* property, stored > inside the java script object. > > I'm using GWT 2.8.2 but no JSNI implementation, only JSInterop objects. > > I'm writing an object (JsType native) in order to configure a chart for > Chart.js. > > @JsType(isNative = true, name = "Object", namespace = JsPackage.GLOBAL) > > Every property is the ID of another object. > > But unfortunately I got an error from Chart.js because it is scanning all > properties keys to get the objects but it does not recognize the value of > *$H*, being a number and not a object. > > scales: { > $H: 135, > x: {id: "x", _charbaId: 2, type: "category", axis: "x", display: true, …}, > y: {id: "y", _charbaId: 3, type: "linear", axis: "y", display: true, …} > } > > It's clear that a hashcode must be stored therefore there is no way to remove > it. > > Searching for a solution, I have found the *javaemul.internal.ObjectHashing* > class which is managing the H$ property, I guess: > > public static native int getHashCode(Object o) /*-{ > return o.$H || (o.$H = @ObjectHashing::getNextHashId()()); > }-*/; > > I think the definition of H$ property must be changed, in order to define the > property "not enumerable" (currently is writable, enumerable and > configurable) using *Object.defineProperty()*, as it is reported > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Object/defineProperty. > > The *Object.defineProperty()* method is not supported into Internet Explorer > 8 therefore if going to manage the hascode in this way, GWT will drop the > support on IE8 as well. > > In the J2CL implementation, it looks like already aligned with my proposal: > > > /** > * Utility functions for setting and retrieving system level hashcodes. > */ > class Hashing { > /** > * Gets a hash code on the passed-in object. > * > * @param {*} obj > * @return {number} > * @public > */ > static $getHashCode(obj) { > let o = /** @type {Object} */ (obj); > return o.$systemHashCode || (Object.defineProperties(o, { > $systemHashCode: {value: Hashing.$getNextHashId(), enumerable: false} }), > o.$systemHashCode); > } > > Anyway, as workaround, I'm rewriting the hashcode property for this object, > maintaining the same value but setting the property as not enumerale and it > seems working. > > > > > -- > 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] > <javascript:>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/52606c59-bbda-4ea4-a7bc-c85c4c9a6777o%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/52606c59-bbda-4ea4-a7bc-c85c4c9a6777o%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > > -- 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/ef7b9614-c203-49fd-88cc-4506842b58d4o%40googlegroups.com.
