Hi,
thanks for your ideas. Definitely wrapping would be needed.
A tough problem wih databinding is the lack of reflection in order to
generate getters and setters. That currently wouldn't work with
overlay types.
But I've had a simple idea: we could have a generic get(property) and
set(property) on the overlay type, therefore removing the need for
reflection. What do you reckon?
public class NativeMibObject extends JavaScriptObject
{
public NativeMibObject(){}
// JSNI methods
public final native Object getProperty( String prop ) /*-{
return
this[prop]; }-*/;
public final native void setProperty( String prop, Object val )
/*-
{ this[prop] = val; }-*/;
}
On May 22, 9:39 am, Sumit Chandel <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi ziglionz,
>
> The ability to cast an overlay type to an interface like Binding would
> require the interface itself to also be an overlay type (via the
> JavaScriptObject.cast() method call). Since the interface itself isn't an
> overlay type, and a custom overlay type can't implement it because it does
> indeed require an implementation for methods declared in the interface,
> perhaps you should consider the approach below.
>
> You can define a wrapping class over the overlay type that can implement the
> Binding interface. The delegation to the overlay type does incur some
> indirection in code, but in the compiled result, there shouldn't be any
> overhead to pay since the compiler will inline the calls.
>
> Hope that helps,
> -Sumit Chandel
>
> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 6:33 PM, ziglionz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
>
> > I've been looking for a databinding framework for GWT and the two most
> > active ones appear to be the Gwittir and the UFacekit projects.
>
> > My question is: can they work at all with overlay types?
>
> > I suspect no, due to the limitations of JavaScriptObject
> >http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/wiki/OverlayTypes
>
> > One of those limitations is: "overlay types cannot implement
> > interfaces that define methods".
> > That prevent overlay types from implementing the Bindable interface,
> > that is required for Gwittir.
>
> > But one can always add methods to an overlay type without explicitely
> > implementing an interface.
> > I wonder if the compiler would allow us to circumvent the above
> > limitation by forcing a casting of an overlay type to (Binding)...
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
