First of all, thanks a lot for you answers. > So overall I would save "massive performance loss" is clearly overstating > and I am pretty sure you don't have numbers to correct me ;-) >
You're right, that's only what i've read in many places about the topic. > Well and as you said the most prominent use case is to be able to build > libraries. > Probably some kind of linker that separate the fragments in a way that is clear what has been updated and lets you replace only the updated fragments... I don't know... Certainly having different output folders for the modules was misleading. However for your use case you have to adopt the Turducken pattern: > http://de.slideshare.net/RobertKeane1/turducken-divide-and-conquer-large-gwt-apps-with-multiple-teams. > > <http://de.slideshare.net/RobertKeane1/turducken-divide-and-conquer-large-gwt-apps-with-multiple-teams> > Yes, I've seen these slides but the iframe thing isn't really what I wanted.. I'll stay with the monolithic app. Thanks again -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
