On 9 juil, 11:31, "marius.andreiana" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi GWT developers, > > There are some concerns on 2.1 MVP approach, which have been raised > herehttp://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit/browse_thread/threa... > and > herehttp://groups.google.com/group/gwt-platform/browse_thread/thread/862c... > > To summarize, here are some quotes: > * It's extremely fast to build an initial scaffold (CRUD for all > entities), but I'm not sure how easy it is to customize it for real > world usage > * When skimming the generated sources I saw A LOT of artifacts, which > I don't feel comfortable with because it means that although > "officially" my code is not coupled with Roo, if I were to drop it I > would have to manage all these generated artifacts myself. > * This expenses example is a nightmare to follow. The bindings/ > wiring of all the pieces both client and server is nuts. > * In M2, things have been cleaned up a bit > > I'm just trying to make sure the final MVP implementation will be > usable without Roo and without automatic code generation, and will be > at least as easy to use and understand as > http://code.google.com/p/gwt-platform/ > . Otherwise, should it be left as a separate project rather than > default GWT approach? > What do others, more knowledgeable persons than me, think?
I really do not approach the different features of 2.1 as a whole "MVP" set of things: there's - RequestFactory and ValueStore (I don't think ValueStore has any real use besides RequestFactory, though I'd be happy to be proved wrong) for a record-oriented client-server communication; - Cell-based widgets for efficient data-backed lists, trees and tables - PlaceController as typed layer over History (objects rather than strings, even though it's not yet plumbed to History, which at least proves it can be used without it) - ActivityManager as an "application controller" (to use the term from the GWT tutorials) on top of PlaceController - and on top of that, GWT provides some base activities plumbed with RequestFactory - and finally, though it's not documented at all, EditorSupport which works with UiBinder in a view to generate "data-binding code" (as far as I understood) You're free to use any of them independently of the others. -- 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.
