Yes, -pretty will give you js names that match your java code, vs obfuscated names. The code size will have some impact on your browser mem usage, but mostly it is a concern for download time - code splitting can help with this.
On May 28, 3:10 pm, Twentyseven <[email protected]> wrote: > In fact my problem is not due to the size of the js generated (even if > it's quite big). > I tried the developer tool from chrome but it's that when I do a head > snapshot the result is unreadable. > Do you mean that if I compile with the -pretty option, the snapshot > will be readable ? > > Could it have a link betwwen the size of the js file and the memory > took by the browser ? > > On May 28, 8:22 pm, kozura <[email protected]> wrote: > > > You might want to generate a compile report and check memory size for > > the compiled > > code:http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/doc/latest/DevGuideCompileReport.html. > > > As for the actual data, any javascript profiler will work, you will > > want to compile with the -pretty option to get legible function names. > > > On May 28, 11:12 am, Twentyseven <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > We're developing a very big application using GWT and we're facing big > > > memory usage by the browser (sometime 2 Gb on Chrome). > > > How could I profile/monitor the use of monitor and determine what are > > > the composite who take the memory ? > > > > thank's -- 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.
