Still not working for me.

  <inherits name="com.google.gwt.core.Core" />
  <collapse-all-properties />
  <set-property name="user.agent" value="safari"/>
  <add-linker name="sso" />

[ERROR] The module must not have multiple fragments when using the Single 
Script Linker.

Probably the problem is that I have many languages (i18n) in my app.
Any other ideas?


On Wednesday, November 30, 2016 at 11:08:13 PM UTC-8, Kirill Prazdnikov 
wrote:
>
> Please try single permutation
>   <set-property name="user.agent" value="safari"/>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 1:50 AM, Slava Pankov <pan...@gmail.com 
> <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> SSO is not working for my project, I cannot successfully compile with it.
>> Put the following to my gwt.xml, but no luck:
>>
>> <inherits name="com.google.gwt.core.Core" />
>> <collapse-all-properties />
>> <add-linker name="sso" />
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 6:44:37 AM UTC-8, Kirill Prazdnikov 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Do you use SSO ? SSO script is smaller then no SSO. Did you run CC on it 
>>> ?
>>>
>>> 29 нояб. 2016 г. 17:29 пользователь "Etienne Basso" <ebas...@gmail.com> 
>>> написал:
>>>
>>> Hi Ignacio,
>>>>
>>>> This is not only about loading time over the network, but also about 
>>>> script parsing by the web browser. 
>>>> In 98% of the case this is not an issue, but I have a very specific use 
>>>> case were the code is directly embedded on a special device which doesn't 
>>>> even have a real CPU but an ASIC emulating one. This device is really 
>>>> really not powerful and GWT is the only framework providing decent speed.  
>>>> I noticed significant differences in the script parsing delay as js 
>>>> sources 
>>>> are getting bigger.
>>>>
>>>> In my case 100KB are a huge deal.
>>>>
>>>> Le samedi 26 novembre 2016 09:56:27 UTC+1, Ignacio Baca Moreno-Torres a 
>>>> écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> But IMO if you really care user experience you have other places to 
>>>>> improve your page. I thinks updating to the last version is always a good 
>>>>> idea, if any security or compatibility blocker problem is detected in 
>>>>> your 
>>>>> version you will need to update, and having a old version won't help. 
>>>>> Also 
>>>>> this helps move forward the community and the lib (GWT), because everyone 
>>>>> focused in the last version, also focus the issues and improvements in 
>>>>> that 
>>>>> version.
>>>>>
>>>>> The small step back eliminating the closure compiler just increase a 
>>>>> bit the code size of your app. But 100k?! did you see the trends and the 
>>>>> average code size of webs? 
>>>>> http://httparchive.org/trends.php?s=All&minlabel=Nov+15+2014&maxlabel=Nov+1+2016,
>>>>>  
>>>>> you should note that even google.com uses 500k in 13request to load, 
>>>>> and it's ""just"" a text inbox in the center of your window (
>>>>> http://httparchive.org/viewsite.php?pageid=70036564).
>>>>>
>>>>> I might be wrong, but probably trying to embed the app.nocache.js in 
>>>>> your index.html will gain some milliseconds, probably just that dummy 
>>>>> change will get more ms than the cache-ables 100k you have lose without 
>>>>> the 
>>>>> closure pass. If your app is quite big, various MBs, you should take care 
>>>>> than the first split point load a minimum as possible to show something 
>>>>> to 
>>>>> the user. But, in your case, less than a 1M, I think that using split 
>>>>> point 
>>>>> is not a good idea. Your code will get cached, and most of static apps 
>>>>> already has more than 500k of JS, so your single page app having a 
>>>>> 500k-1M 
>>>>> of JS is pretty reasonable.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can go forward and apply the progressive web concepts (
>>>>> https://developers.google.com/web/progressive-web-apps/checklist). 
>>>>> Pretty sure you get there without the closure compiler ;). Service 
>>>>> workers 
>>>>> will allow maximum control to preload other split point or resources, and 
>>>>> to absolutely control how your app caches, so you can use previous 
>>>>> version, 
>>>>> load the next one and in the next page reload the new app version will be 
>>>>> used. This is not easy at all, but... some time we focus on the 
>>>>> optimization we have no control of (like the closure pass) and we don't 
>>>>> apply other we have control of, but that requires our effort.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, 😀 update to GWT 2.8! it's awesome!, try other solutions to 
>>>>> improve page loads and share how you do it!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 10:39:44 PM UTC+1, Slava Pankov wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Jens
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've tried WITHOUT any success to use closure compiler externally 
>>>>>> with GWT 2.8
>>>>>> See my question here: 
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/google-web-toolkit/closure$20compiler%7Csort:date/google-web-toolkit/k_kjIv9Klsg/LZAZiUf9BAAJ
>>>>>> Still want to find out exact steps to get it working :-(
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 2:43:11 AM UTC-8, Kirill Prazdnikov 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Jens, 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What if we have SSO linker ? 
>>>>>>> Then no hacks is needed, right ?
>>>>>>> Then just run the Google Closure Compiler on the output.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>> 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/IIQk4xH0-g8/unsubscribe
>> .
>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
>> To post to this group, send email to google-we...@googlegroups.com 
>> <javascript:>.
>> Visit this group at https://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 google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
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