There is a very good reason why GWT couldn't produce the tight JS it does if it was using a dynamic language like Ruby. If you watch Bruce Johnson's (co-creator of GWT) Google I/O presentation, Faster-than- Possible Code: Deferred Binding with GWT (http://sites.google.com/site/ io/faster-than-possible-code-deferred-binding-with-gwt), you'll see why the GWT compiler can only be as optimized as it is when it compiles statically typed languages. A lot of the GWT optimizations rely on types being known at compile time and the removal of Reflections, these two properties are fundamental in most dynamic languages and would thus make it impossible to optimize code the resulting JS the way the GWT compiler does.
Regards, Arthur Kalmenson On Aug 24, 7:56 am, Juan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't see how using byte code would be any better than using source > > code, since the source code has just as much information. > > It's not about having more information, it's about the possibility of > using other JVM supported languages. Language lock-in seems like a > severe limitation for a platform like the JVM -that it's clearly > evolving into a multi-language platform- > > > GWT probably couldn't generate fast JavaScript if it used Ruby instead > > of Java, because it wouldn't have the type information it needs for > > optimization. > > I assume this is only your guess. Anyway MS seems to be following this > way so soon we will see how fast it's (anyway I don't see why it > should be slower than Ruby -as they are both dynamically typed > languages-) > > Anyway I was just wondering if anyone did know some solid reason as > why they didn't use bytecode interpretation. > > Juan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
