Call me old school but for me direction in which GWT 3.0 is going is 
strange - if I'm forced to use HTML5/JavaScript libraries instead GWT 
widgets why I should do anything in Java in the first place - just grab 
Angular or Ember and be done - GWT doesn't help me too much with server 
side code anyway. The whole purpose of using GWT/GWTP was to avoid to deal 
with JavaScript, at least in my case.

For me TeaVM has completely different approach to the problem than GWT - it 
allows language agnostic web application development (I never liked GWT no 
prisoners taken approach - Java or nothing - but as you know there was 
nothing better in "dark ages" of web application development)  - even that 
end result is very similar - JavaScript code running in the browser.
I wonder if something similar like Java Byte Code to JavaScript could be 
done with Microsoft CLI to JavScript (just wild shot - I'm not too familiar 
with the whole .Net infrastructure - different programming environment)

On Tuesday, December 1, 2015 at 9:45:20 PM UTC-5, Satguru Srivastava wrote:
>
> Not sure if TeaVM serves different need than GWT. Seems like both want to 
> provide a better alternative to JavaScript.
> Now TeaVM does not have anything equivalent to GWT widgets but then  it 
> seems, after watching the GWT Create session videos, the recommendation, 
> for newer apps, is not to use the GWT widgets anyway.
> Instead of GWT widgets the direction seems to be to use more HTML5 based 
> components like web components polymer etc which technology like the newer 
> GWT JSInterop could make it easier to consume.
> Like GWT JSInterop , TeaVM has something called JSO which also propose to 
> make consuming java script libraries easier.
> I haven't used JSInterop or JSO so can't compare the two.
>
> Anyway, what is interesting is the Java Source Code to Javascript vs Java 
> Byte Code to JavaScript issue.
> Wonder if GWT creators ever debated this issue when they started work on 
> GWT.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015 at 12:28:20 PM UTC-6, Adam M wrote:
>>
>> TeavVM seams be very interesting project however for me it looks like it 
>> serves different needs that GWT. It has tons of very interesting stuff and 
>> using Java Byte Code for compilation to JavaScript makes it almost 100% 
>> language agnostic as source code input (in theory - you can compile it to 
>> byte code and run it on JVM - you can run it with TeaVM - of course with 
>> some reasonable restrictions because of JavaScript nature).
>> However for me there are two major show stoppers for broad adoption in 
>> production:
>>  - project is still in early growing phase 
>>  - virtually this is one pony show - except Alexey there are no major 
>> contributors (nothing against Alexey of course he is brilliant guy)
>>
>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2015 at 10:43:44 AM UTC-5, Satguru Srivastava 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> So, I recently came across TeaVM (http://teavm.org/)
>>> Similar to GWT but unlike GWT, which compiles Java Source Code to 
>>> JavaScript, TeaVM compiles Java Byte Code to JavaScript.
>>> It is an interesting approach.
>>> The big advantage to this approach is that you do not have to create and 
>>> maintain your own compiler.
>>> You ride on the back of the JavaC compiler and can take advantage of the 
>>> optimizations, latest changes and updates made to the compiler.
>>> So while GWT is working on supporting Java 8 , TeaVM already provides 
>>> support for that.
>>>
>>> What do you guys think?
>>> What are the pros/cons of this approach ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to