Just to clarify, I am NOT defending JS from bytecode. I just think both
strategies have pros and cons.
Let's give MS some time to mature it's product and see what's the best
approach.

2008/8/25 Jason Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

>
> Quite frankly, my point of view on this subject is: reverse engineering
> Java
> byte-code is a black-art.
>
> Different Java compilers produce different byte-code structures, often
> confusing
> these tools. The tools themselves are constantly trying to patch strange
> little
> behaviours as the compilers change and the byte-code changes. Decompilers
> are
> nasty beasts on the inside, and often break while trying to decompile
> certain
> structures.
>
> One of the advantages of using byte-code for GWT would be multi-language
> support? I think not! It would be hard enough just trying to maintain a Sun
> JavaC decompiler, let alone trying to get other language compilers (and
> their
> supporting API's) running in JavaScript.
>
> Go take a look at the JRE emulation code in GWT for String. Then think
> about how
> well this would fly. A bit like a herd of drunk elephants.
>
> Magno Machado wrote:
> > Depending on the level of the performance penalty, loading class on
> > demand is much better than downloading all the application on start up,
> > as GWT does.
> > ----
> > Another advantage of generate JS from compiled code is that one can
> > write a lib and don't have to make the sources available for users.
> >
> > 2008/8/25 Maxim <maxim.ge <http://maxim.ge>@gmail.com <http://gmail.com
> >>
> >
> >
> >     On Aug 25, 7:46 am, Arthur Kalmenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >     <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
> >      > 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.
> >
> >     As I understand from:
> >
> >     http://livelabs.com/volta/docs/issues/
> >     "At run time a Volta application downloads many files from the
> server,
> >     one for each class that is used.  The classes are loaded lazily, i.e.
> >     not downloaded until they are needed..."
> >
> >     they do not need "by size" optimization - they load only those
> classes
> >     which are really used.
> >
> >      >From other side, loading class-by-class can seriously affect
> >     perfomance ...
> >
> >
> >
> > >
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to