I find the "type of complexity" of BigTable to be far easier to handle. BigTable operates in a consistent manner and once you understand the basic principles (watch *all* of the Google I/O video) everything pretty much makes sense. The "type of complexity" of GXT is endless little unrelated errata that ends up becoming death by a million papercuts.
I did spend a lot of time working with the GXT grid for part of the backend of my application, including the in-line editor. It took a long time to get right, far more time than the feature was worth. I don't know what the alternatives are for a heavily grid-oriented app, fortunately mine wasn't. I didn't manage to get the GWT and GXT panels to play nicely together. It's not a comfortable thing to do - they behave completely differently, so you not only have two separate and nearly isolated learning curves to climb, but the grey intersection in between. Plus you're talking about loading parallel frameworks of javascript to render the UI, doubling the download. Modal draggable dialogs - I don't use them. Drag and drop - I'll tell you in a week. But if it's anything like my experience with forms, layouts, animations, or charts, it'll be easier to build from scratch than to climb the related GXT learning curve. BTW, for some help with the appengine datastore, check out http://code.google.com/p/objectify-appengine/. Even if you don't use the library, the docs might help. Jeff On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Shawn Brown <[email protected]> wrote: >> The problems with GXT are basically summed up by: > > Not to dismiss your experience in anyway, but actually GXT to me seems > easier than Google's appengine. At least with GXT I can see the > source (well not of the current master branch but ...) to clarify what > something does. App-Engine is much murkier and if you want to talk > about lack of documentation (especially on bigtable). > > OK, GXT and App-Engine are different products but as organizations go, > GXT and Google are not that far apart from my view with AppEngine > being the worst. > > Anyway, if you can do it in GWT but not GXT then isn't that fine. > They are not mutually exclusive. > > Here is what Darell (GXT lead dev) posted: > > "GXT containers vs. GWT panels. GXT containers and layouts are great > when laying out your applications interface. They provide precise > control of your interface including area resizing. For these benefits, > there is a cost. Basically, you are controlling sizes and positions > via JavaScript, rather than natively by the browser. You should not > rule the use of GWT panels when building GXT applications. If you are > using many GXT HorizontalPanels and VerticalPanel's I would suggest > you consider the GWT version of the same widgets. As the GXT version > uses layouts which the GWT panels do not. But the best choise really > will depend on your particular use." > > All the Best, > > -- > > 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. > > > -- 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.
