The type must be known for instanced objects, not generic object passing to methods. In GWT, I can't do the following: Object o = new Object (); Instead, I can do this: Object o = new ListBox (false); (altough I surely would typecast again to ListBox so that I can do something with that object).
What is that thing about honoring JavaBean? :) I don't know how, but we have solved the problem, but just by coincidence. Up until now, I couldn't find a reasonable explanation for what happened or what the problem was. On Oct 3, 3:52 pm, "olivier nouguier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Since GWT 1.4, IsSerializable is not necessary, Serializable is enough. > > 1:) AFAIK the Type must be known at compile time so setObject(Object o) is > out ! > You should have a base Serializable class (know at compile time) > > 2:) The JavaBean contract must be honored : That getThat / setThat(That > that). > > > > On Fri, Oct 3, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Alex D <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello everybody, I have encountered a very weird problem with shared > > code between client and server. > > > The client is GWT compatible Java code and the server is pure Java. > > > We have created a serializable class, Request (public class Request > > implements IsSerializable) which we want to use to exchange data > > between client and server code. The class was included in the .rpc > > file generated by the compiler, so it's indeed serializable. Moreover, > > inside this class we have a method that sets the object for this > > request; inside this method, an encoding protocol is obtained via > > object's class name (if this is a list, we typecast it to List and get > > the first element's class name - if the size is != 0). The code for > > all protocols is compatible with GWT, since it compiles successfully, > > the request object arrives at the servlet and the response back. > > > However, writing any of the following lines of code has no effect: > > request.setObject (o) > > or > > request.getObject () > > > It acts as if they don't exist, in either client/server code. I have > > print-lined before and after the request in servlet, and all prints > > BEFORE the request sets a list of objects work, BUT all after DON'T; > > this would indicate that setting an object is a problem, BUT then, the > > function exists successfully, since client code receives the request. > > You would ask 'if you get a new request back, what's the problem?' > > > The problem is handling this request, since I have agents that handle > > the object inside this request, > > so ... request.getObject () - again, something breaks, because I used > > Window.alert("...") just before getting the object and again one just > > after. The second one doesn't get executed, but no errors, no > > exceptions!! > > > I should mention that hosted mode works just fine and I am able to > > display the object (so it's handled correctly). > > > Is there any problem if I use a shared package/classes (within same > > project) for both client and server code? How would I detect this > > problem since I don't get any errors? > > > Sorry for the long post, I hope you have the patience to read it :) > > -- > "Quand le dernier arbre sera abattu, la dernière rivière asséchée, le > dernier poisson péché, l'homme va s'apercevoir que l'argent n'est pas > comestible" > - proverbe indien Cri --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to Google-Web-Toolkit@googlegroups.com 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---