Comments inline.
On 01/20/2010 10:06 AM, Eduardo Nunes wrote:
> Comments inline.
>
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Jeff Chimene <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> Hi Eduardo:
>
> Comments inline.
>
> On 01/20/2010 09:34 AM, Eduardo Nunes wrote:
> > I'm using a different approach, below a draft source code of my
> > AppController class. What do you think?
> >
> > public class AppController implements ValueChangeHandler<String> {
> >
> > private final Map<String, PresenterType> urls;
> > private final Map<PresenterType, Provider<? extends Presenter>>
> presenters;
> >
> > @Inject
> > public AppController() {
> >
> > urls = new TreeMap<String, PresenterType>();
>
> Could you expand a bit on why the choice of TreeMap vs. another HashMap?
>
>
> Usually when I have a String as a key, I use TreeMap, it's faster to get
> the information but slower to add. In this case the add process will
> happen just once, so it's not a problem.
Check.
>
>
> > presenters = new HashMap<PresenterType, Provider<? extends
> Presenter>>();
> >
> > urls.put("/contacts/list", PresenterType.CONTACT_LIST);
> >
> > History.addValueChangeHandler(this);
> >
> > }
> >
> > @Override
> > public void onValueChange(ValueChangeEvent<String> event) {
> >
> > final PresenterType presenterType = urls.get(event.getValue());
> >
> > if (presenterType != null) {
> >
> > final Provider<? extends Presenter> presenter = presenters
> > .get(presenterType);
>
> Is there a way to do this asynchronously at startup? I'm interested in
> the shortest response time during event handling.
>
>
> What do you mean by asynchronously in this case?
Command(new IncrementalCommand(){}).
However, see the next comment.
>
>
>
> >
> > final Presenter<? extends Display> instance = presenter.get();
> > instance.bind();
>
> Ibid.
>
> >
> > RootPanel.get().add(instance.getDisplay().asWidget());
> >
> > }
> >
> > }
> >
> > @Inject
> > void configureContactListPresenter(Provider<ContactListPresenter>
> > presenter) {
> > presenters.put(PresenterType.CONTACT_LIST, presenter);
>
> Ibid. I don't understand why the get() can't be done here (i.e.
> asynchronously at startup)
>
>
> If I do the get, google-gin will create the whole object tree connected
> to this presenter, in this case it will create the view too. This means
> that at startup time, all presenters and views will be created, which in
> my opinion isn't good.
OK. So the above ValueChange().get() returns a previously instantiated
object. Negligable overhead when have maximum user attention. Check.
Still, I've noticed "some delay" at runtime w/ gin+mvp. I'd like to
think that the implementation in this thread w/r/t/
configureContactListPresenter() could be handed to Command(new
IncrementalCommand(){}). I'm choosing IncrementalCommand() because it
seems that there will be more than one instantiating get() call. Maybe
configurePresenters()? Perhaps that's an implementation detail best left
to individual circumstances.
--
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.
