Awesome! Thanks! :) On Nov 19, 2:19 am, Thomas Broyer <[email protected]> wrote: > On Nov 19, 2:52 am, MonkeyMike <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > I am creating a GWT Overlay Type library, and have just written an > > ant build file for creating the JAR file that GWT applications will > > import. To maintain code integrity, I make the JAR creation depend on > > a java compile of all the code, and also a gwt compile. Obviously, > > this is meant to ensure that the code in the library is acceptable > > Java, and also that it is acceptable GWT. > > > When I run the GWT compiler, however, I get an error related to the > > fact that my library has no entry point... > > > ------------------------- > > Buildfile: C:\Data\Dev\EclipseWorkspaceTrunk\gwtgfx\build.xml > > javac-compile: > > [javac] Compiling 2 source files to C:\Data\Dev > > \EclipseWorkspaceTrunk\gwtgfx\build\javac > > gwt-compile: > > [java] Compiling module gwtgfx.GwtGfx > > [java] [ERROR] Module has no entry points defined > > > BUILD FAILED > > C:\Data\Dev\EclipseWorkspaceTrunk\gwtgfx\build.xml:25: The following > > error occurred while executing this line: > > C:\Data\Dev\EclipseWorkspaceTrunk\gwtgfx\build.xml:45: Java returned: > > 1 > > > Total time: 3 seconds > > ------------------------- > > > Of course, it makes perfect sense that my library has no entry point > > since it is, in fact, a library... not an application. > > > Is there an option for the GWT compiler to do only the parts that I > > want here? I want the GWT compiler to ensure, for example, that all > > of my JavaScriptObject subclasses follow the specified restrictions > > (has a protected no-arg constructor, instance methods are final, > > etc)... and anything else that the GWT compiler might do now, or in > > the future, to check that the GWT code is valid. If not having an > > entry point means that there is no reasonable way to do one or more of > > the compiler steps, then that should be okay because those steps > > probably aren't relevant for a library anyways. > > > As a temporary hack, I guess I am going to include an entry point, > > but I really don't want to ship this. Is there a better alternative? > > > Thanks in advance. :) > > There's a -validateOnly flag that doesn't mandate an entry point (and > should check that all public classes can be compiled).
-- 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=.
