I have developed a few GWT applications but never used the RPC. I didn't 
feel comfortable using RemoveService, RemoteServiceServlet, and ServiceDef; 
it reminded me the days of CORBA and IDL. I have been staying with 
extending the RequestCallback.

On Thursday, July 7, 2016 at 5:54:11 AM UTC-4, Philippe Gonze wrote:
>
> Totally agree. GWT 3.0 without RPC would be GWT 3.dead for many of the 
> current GWT developpers,
>
> For me GWT is "Web development based on Java expertise, with practically 
> no other technology implications". Extremely powerful and pleasant. Seems 
> that GWT 3.0 is announced as "no more GWT":
>
> Our plan will probably to stay with 2.8... But will 2.8 ever be released 
> ??? Developers have been waiting for it for so long... GWT's communication 
> is very strange and paradoyal.
>
>
>
>
> Le vendredi 5 février 2016 10:59:02 UTC+1, [email protected] a écrit :
>>
>> I understand that the future of GWT RPC does not seem bright in 3.0+ but 
>> I want to express my opinion that this is a HUGE mistake. GWT RPC is one of 
>> the most important things in GWT as it truly ties things together in large 
>> apps. Sure, it its raw form it is a bit cumbersome to use but it enables 
>> true code reuse with no extra coding. This is what sets GWT apart from the 
>> run-of-the-mill frameworks out there. Creating custom requests and 
>> responses is not maintainable and scalable in a large app that depends on 
>> extensibility and polymorphism. Ability to communicate almost any Java 
>> object graph without having to specifically annotate or declare anything, 
>> while preserving singletons is a huge advantage.
>>
>> Sure, it lacks a lot of things. We used it with out proprietary wrapper 
>> framework in a way that allows us to simply annotate sever-side methods we 
>> want to expose to the client and everything else is automagically handled - 
>> the client gains the visibility into relevant server classes and methods 
>> with same signatures other than getting results asynchronously. One can 
>> pass results of some method call as an argument of another all without 
>> leaving the sever and without having to wire boilerplate/weird code.For 
>> example, if we had the following code on the server
>>
>>   public class Foo {
>>     public static Bar getBar() {
>>       return new Bar();
>>     }
>>     public static String someText() {
>>       return "Blah: " + System.currentTimeMillis();
>>     }
>>   }
>>   public class Bar {
>>     public String twice(String text) {
>>       return text + text;
>>     }
>>   }
>>   
>>     
>>
>> .... with our annotations on the server (not shown) the following client 
>> code would be possible:
>>
>>    Foo.getBar().twice(Foo.someText(), new AsyncCallback<String>() {
>>      ...
>>      public void onSuccess(String result) { 
>>        ...
>>      }
>>    }
>>
>> ... no need for creating server + async interfaces, etc.
>>
>> With every other alternative we lose on simplicity and ability to 
>> communicate. All others require us to create more client-server 
>> communication code which we have been able to avoid.
>>
>> Needless to say, we'd be stuck in pre-3.0 land as we have a large code 
>> investment in GWT RPC - we could not accept losing it... but we do want to 
>> go to the newest GWT at any time. It would be greatly disappointing if we 
>> couldn't do this.
>>
>> I do not see the advantages of losing RPC. It does what it does better 
>> than anything else out there and is irreplaceable.
>>
>> Please do not get rid of it. Enhance it. It is what makes GWT better than 
>> the rest. It is what, together with the rest, allows seamless and uniform 
>> language use across the client and the server. 
>>
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to