Hi Thomas, I agree. I just don't see any advantage for GWT in this case. So I'd say, that using it only makes sense, if there are other reasons, which weren't expressed in the question.
By the way, GWT uses NekoHTML, too (it's in gwt-dev.jar). Why do you prefer the HTML parser you mentioned? Chris On Apr 19, 1:01 am, Thomas Broyer <t.bro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > - Using pure JavaScript (should usually be enough to do this.) > > Why would it be better than GWT? > > > - Using jQuery selectors, if it gets more complex. > > GwtQuery gives you the same, in GWT. > > > - Or write a quick standalone Java App which parses the HTML (using > > htmlunit, or NekoHTML directly), walk the DOM, and write it to a file. > > Yes, this is an actual alternative (I'd rather use > htmlparser.validator.nu though for the HTML parsing) Why? GWT uses Neko, too... > > Using GWT or another JS toolkit is not the correct answer when the > question is "can GWT do it?" or "is GWT fast enough?": GWT can do what > JS do, and speed is mainly a browser issue. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google Web Toolkit" group. > To post to this group, send email to google-web-tool...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group > athttp://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 google-web-tool...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
