I can see the logic of GWT 3.0. The browser has evolved a lot since GWT was first designed. Back in those days every browser had significant quirks and the lowest common denominator was very low. In 2015 there is less reason for a big layer between domain code and the browser. I think the same applies to JQuery etc. I also think GWT wasn't quite sure how to do layout which harms love for it. There is a fork in the Widgets for the Layout and non-Layout classes. Hence two TabPanels etc? A fight between those that wanted to do layout like Swing and those that wanted to lean on the browser renderer?
On Monday, October 19, 2015 at 8:18:14 AM UTC+1, steve Zara wrote: > > I'm puzzled as to what the disadvantages could be of GWT Widgets. They > are, after all, translated to efficient JavaScript and allow full use of > the browser. I can see that some developers might want to integrate with > JavaScript frameworks, but others, like me, start writing applications in > pure GWT and use of JavaScript is just like use of JNI in typical Java code > - for those rare things you can't do in Java, or to connect with libraries. > > I guess if there was a split there could be much more work on what many > developers seem to want, such as a cross-browser debugging toolkit that > makes use of source maps consistent and gives a better Java-style view of > variables. > > I want to see Java as a primary language for browser development, not some > secondary add-on to JavaScript frameworks. > > On 19 October 2015 at 07:39, salk31 <[email protected] <javascript:>> > wrote: > >> Maybe there is effectively going to be a fork? So if the interest was >> there could be GWT 2.9 - GWT 2.123 >> >> I think that might represent the truth that there is one user base that >> wants to build Java apps that happen to run in a browser vs users who are >> working on products that need to squeeze everything out of the browser. >> >> The discussion about classic dev mode didn't seem very healthy >> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/google-web-toolkit/QSEjbhhHB4g >> maybe because of this split? >> >> >> >> On Sunday, October 18, 2015 at 5:13:12 PM UTC+1, steve Zara wrote: >>> >>> I'm eager for GWT 2.8 because of Lambda support, but I can't see that my >>> company will ever use GWT 3.0 if what you write is true. We have products >>> that make substantial use of GWT Widgets, and there is no prospect of >>> re-writing to some other system. GWT without the Widgets just isn't GWT - >>> it's just a Java -> JavaScript transpiler. We also use UIBinder heavily. >>> >>> Of course, this may not be what happens. It's a symptom of what seems >>> to be a common problem with GWT - lack of clear information about what is >>> happening with the project (still no sign of GWT 2.8, and no indication of >>> when there might be a sign). >>> >>> GWT really is wonderful and has been a source of great productivity for >>> my company for many years. I really hope the heart of it isn't slashed out >>> to produce some incompatible new version. >>> >>> On Saturday, 17 October 2015 11:36:45 UTC+1, salk31 wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks Thomas, >>>> >>>> For my own use I'm going to keep a list of what I think I know >>>> http://salk31.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/gwt-30-migration.html corrections >>>> welcome. >>>> >>>> I can see why they want to reduce the scope of GWT and integrate (not >>>> build) but is such a high quality complete package in 2.7 it is a bit >>>> scary. I've had to use BroadVision, Vignette, Struts 1, Cocoon, Wicket... >>>> in the past and GWT felt like finally web development had grown up. >>>> o >>>> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 5:44:25 PM UTC+1, Thomas Broyer wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I think nobody has such information yet; not even Google who are >>>>> pushing for the change. They do have many apps that use widgets and RPC >>>>> today (example: Google Groups, the exact app I'm typing this message >>>>> into) >>>>> and will need to come up with a migration path for those apps too. >>>>> >>>>> On Friday, October 16, 2015 at 2:19:02 PM UTC+2, salk31 wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there a guide somewhere of migration path to 3.0 per feature? >>>>>> >>>>>> I've been trying to follow these threads but I'm still not sure on >>>>>> the future of things like RequestFactory and Editor. They heavily depend >>>>>> on >>>>>> GWT.create and the latter depends on Widgets, are they really going away? >>>>>> >>>>>> We have a large-ish app so want to start worrying about migration >>>>>> even if we are long way off. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers >>>>>> >>>>>> Sam >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday, July 28, 2015 at 10:01:21 AM UTC+1, Jens wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Where can I read that GWT RPC and widget system will be dropped with >>>>>>>> GWT 3.0? Is there a presentation / doc online? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And what does it mean that GWT.create will be dropped? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> And: really dropped or set as deprecated? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> GWT 3.0 drops support for JSNI and GWT.create(). JSNI will be >>>>>>> replaced with JsInterop and GWT.create() will be replaced with either >>>>>>> annotation processors (generate-with case) or dependency >>>>>>> injection/System.getProperty (replace-with case). So all library code >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> GWT which depends on those two features need to be ported to the new >>>>>>> GWT >>>>>>> compiler. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Widget is probably doable but GWT-RPC might be really difficult (if >>>>>>> not impossible) because the current GWT-RPC generator asks questions >>>>>>> like >>>>>>> "give me all types that implement XYZ" which an annotation processor >>>>>>> can >>>>>>> only hardly answer (if at all). GWT-RPC might be portable if some >>>>>>> refactoring in the app using GWT-RPC is acceptable (e.g. slapping >>>>>>> annotations on DTOs instead of marking them with Serializable). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You can see videos about that topic from the GWT 2015 meet up at >>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1yReUCGwGvrqscLu1EAyYRPrr0ceEHLE >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Slides are linked in the playlist description. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- J. >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "GWT Users" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/google-web-toolkit/SjvCh37nahw/unsubscribe >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> [email protected] <javascript:>. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] >> <javascript:>. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
