And here are the authors to disagree :)
1) Yes, we make intentional departures from the GWT way, such as..
2) SmartGWT has better cross-browser consistency than GWT itself.
Why? Because GWT relies on native browser behavior and CSS for
layout, and this is where all the quirks come from. We do layout with
layout manager classes, more in the style of Java Swing. Yes, GWT has
layout managers, but what they're actually doing in many cases is
relying on the browser interpretation of sizes and layout rules.
Also, re-skinning your application with GWT is straight CSS, whereas
SmartGWT provides an abstraction that separates styling-as-such from
layout.
3) The library is cached, so you only increase the first-ever load
time. If you have a site where you are trying to display something as
fast as possible for a visitor who comes only once, this may matter.
If you're building an enterprise application and people use it
regularly, it doesn't matter, the extreme productivity benefits of the
SmartGWT grid (and other components) are much more important. On
broadband, SmartGWT applications come up faster than the launch time
of Word or Acrobat, so it's right in line with user expectations for
enterprise/desktop applications.
As far as the future, my take is that GWT cannot both retain an
ultralight footprint *and* provide the features of an enterprise
platform like SmartGWT - static code analysis just isn't a strong
enough approach to code trimming to enable this. I covered this in
depth here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg34128.html
You've also got to consider the state of the art, of course. Will
your customers be doing a head-to-head comparison on functionality and
productivity between your competitor, who used SmartGWT, and your app,
which uses plain GWT grids? That's going to go very badly against
you.
On Mar 12, 1:58 am, Nathan Wells <[email protected]> wrote:
> I would say you are correct on the disadvantages of SmartGwt. There
> are those (most notably the author(s)) who I know disagree with me.
> GWTers recognize the need for a more robust, data-backed table
> solution, and it's currently in the works, targeted for 2.1. Our
> company decided to go with SmartGwt for now, then migrate to a more
> "Gwtfull" solution later.
>
> On Mar 12, 1:29 am, mariyan nenchev <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Try scroll paging table from gwt incubator, i think it was updated to gwt
> > 2.0.
>
>
--
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.
