> After some research I'm thinking maybe we should use the gwt dynamic > translations (somewhat like you mention mars1412), but this implies > that all language strings of the application should be transferred all > at once and then will be stored as a javascript variable on the > client. It's not such a disaster, but it would be nice to prevent > having to load all language strings at once. > > OT: And as for static translation, I'm not too impressed with how that > works anyway, it should have been much simpler. in my opinion the static translation stuff is really great and a magnitude better than any dynamic translation * compiler optimization * will not include any unused translations * will inline the variables for best performance * compile-time checking: * this is an invaluable feature, because you can make sure at compile time, that the translations have the correct number of variables and even type-checking is possible * when you code against the text-interface, it's very easy in your IDE to search for all places where the text is used * and I guess: with the RunAsync feature the static translation way will nly the texts that are really required
do you really want to abandon all this, just to see the changes immediately? If so, I'm afraid there are no simple ways to get around loading all texts at once on startup. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
