Brian, It sounds to me like the scenarios you describe here would be addressed by the runAsync work currently underway. The runAsync feature will allow the developer to indicate portions of code that can be lazily loaded from the server as needed. The compiler takes care of separating and ensuring that things get loaded in the proper order. You can learn more about it by searching the contributor's forum.
- Isaac On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was thinking about this a little more, and threw around a couple > ideas where "it would be nice" to break a monolithic-at-runtime > application into runtime modules (analagous to breaking an .exe into a > bunch of .dll's). > > How much javascript can a browser deal with? If there's some maximum > size an application can reach before a browser has problems using it, > it'd be nice to break the application into runtime chunks and bring > them in as needed. > > Administration screens -- I don't bundle admin functionality into an > app, but it would be nice, based on user permissions, to just add the > Admin panel to the application. Instead, it's a whole separate app > (not that big of a deal, really). > > Anyway, although I said just make a monolithic application as I > believe it's the right thing most of the time, not knowing if there's > an application size upper-limit size makes me wonder. > > > On Nov 4, 3:30 pm, walden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Brian, >> >> I think it should be made clear that GWT Modules are reuse packagings, >> just like Java classes, and don't even imply a runtime application >> architecture. The only reason for breaking code into Modules is to >> reuse it by inheritance rather than duplicating code. >> >> Walden >> >> On Nov 4, 11:58 am, Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Err, "size and speed were increased by keeping it in one app" should >> > have read, "size was decreased, speed was increased by keeping all the >> > modules in one app." >> >> > On Nov 4, 11:56 am, Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > > I wanted to do something similar to having a bunch of independent >> > > modules interacting on a page, but gave up, and stuck with the >> > > monolithic app. I think you really need to analyze if it's worth >> > > breaking up the app into modules and trying to work with all this glue >> > > you'll need. For instance, there's quite an overhead in size for just >> > > a hello,world gwt app. You'll be paying this overhead for each >> > > module. Also, once the monolitic app is cached by the browser, it's >> > > there until cleared, so there's basically no penalty for having the >> > > app on multiple pages, even if it's not used "that much" (ie, not all >> > > modules are visible). Also, you can break up your monolitic app so you >> > > only create the classes needed in the given state, so you don't eat up >> > > memory for modules you're not displaying, etc, etc. It just ended up >> > > not making sense to break up the app -- >> >> > > What are the advantages to breaking the app into modules? Size? >> > > Speed? In my case, size and speed were increased by keeping it all in >> > > one app, and relying on browser caching. >> >> > > On Nov 4, 9:50 am, Thomas Broyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > > > On 4 nov, 13:11, walden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > > > > Joe, >> >> > > > > You don't need DOM events, per se. Use Observer Pattern. Your Login >> > > > > module doesn't need to know who's subscribed. It just needs to >> > > > > implement the Observable interface (register listeners, fire login >> > > > > state change events). Your other modules are in fact dependent upon >> > > > > Login. They need to know how to register listeners, receive events, >> > > > > recognize Login events, and then I would suggest you let them probe >> > > > > the Login module directly for login state. >> >> > > > > If you look at how ChangeListener and SourcesChangeEvents work in >> > > > > GWT, >> > > > > there are all the elements of the Observer pattern you need, and you >> > > > > can copy that. >> >> > > > Walden, he has and wants (and needs?) distinct *applications* (not >> > > > only distinct *modules*), Java-GWT is not an option here. >> >> > > > @Joe: you'll have to implement such an observer/observable pattern in >> > > > pure JavaScript in your host page, and use JSNI in your applications >> > > > to register handlers/fire events.- Hide quoted text - >> >> > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
