What a shame, I didn't read everything... Just saw your example, I really don't like that naming convention of yours :D I would prefer something more type safe that doesn't involve long named fonctions separated with $ to access something.
Cheers, On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Christian Goudreau < [email protected]> wrote: > I believe is good to have 2 frameworks instead of one... competition leads >> to great things.. > > I agree with that point :D > > I will love to hear your opinion on this: >> http://code.google.com/p/guit/wiki/GuitViewDesign > > Already took a loot, well first note, I'm not a conventional MVP user and > don't take my arguments as if I wanted to be one :D I'm more a MVP part 2 > like explained in the GWT page. Since you've done a good job to automate the > event process between the view and the presenter, what will follow will > probably not apply to your framework. No need for your binder class if you > do MVP part 2 :D No custom annotation needed too and also no need to learn > anything but what GWT already offer in that case. > > I think that when GWT introduced UiBinder, the already gave us a passive > view that does nothing rendering our implementation of the MVP pattern a > little bit more complexe since we had to pass everything from another > passive view to the presenter. That's why, I'm giving a little more work to > my "views" that apply to simple local task that isn't relevant to the > presenter, thus simplifying my code and making it more easy to understand > and more easy to read. Yes I have to test it, but I have simple test to > write that I would have wrote inside my presenters anyway. Now I have a > clear distinction between what's relevant to my app and what's relevant only > to my view. You may disagree with me, but I ripped around 15 % lines of code > in my apps by doing this. > > What's your going to do will disallow that, while not being a bad thing if > you really have two passive view (view and view.ui.xml), but wouldn't be > enough for that pattern that I now love :D > > Then another big question, how this will work with UiBinder for custom > widgets that you'll make ? Yeah well, I think we fall back to old ways > without any presenter associated. > > Anyway, I'm more a doer than a thinker, so I'll let anyone else elaborate > on the subject :D (Philippe Beaudoin is the brain behind Gwt-Platform :D) > > Cheers, > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Gal Dolber <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Christian! >> >> I will love to join forces to have one great framework, but the truth is >> that Guit started a year ago as the infrastructure for a project I am about >> to finish right now. The funny part is that I also started looking at the >> code of gwt-presenter and mvp4g. >> >> I believe is good to have 2 frameworks instead of one... competition leads >> to great things.. >> >> Now, about the Async places, if you annotate the Presenter's Place with >> RunAsync your place automatically gets splitted ( >> http://code.google.com/p/guit/wiki/PlaceManager , at the bottom). >> >> Also, one important thing about Guit is that all that generated code that >> it produces is the same that you will hand-write without it. >> You can see that looking at the generated code... you will only find event >> registrations and a few field bindings, but you will never feel like loosing >> control over your code. >> >> I will love to hear your opinion on this: >> http://code.google.com/p/guit/wiki/GuitViewDesign >> That's the craziest change in my mvp implementation so far, and I loving >> it. I am looking for down-sides and extra requirements that I didn't think >> of yet. >> >> Cheers! >> >> 2010/8/24 Christian Goudreau <[email protected]> >> >> I saw that you can add an annotation over functions, but over an entire >>> place, I don't know. Also, yeah well you may be generating a lot of code >>> with generators, but I'm afraid that in the end, you'll loose freedom for >>> customization. >>> >>> I would have loved to join forces into making a great framework instead >>> of having different products, but I think each project have their good and >>> bad points, even if we still have to fully compare each products.Our >>> devotion to GWT-Platform started with Gwt-Presenter and we're committed to >>> support it and improve it along with our users. Our commitment is to the >>> community and it will always be a priority to improve our users experience >>> with GWT-Platform and GWT. >>> >>> Anyway, nice job Gal, it's sure saves a lot of boiler plate for simple >>> web pages like our Samples, I'll take a look even more deeper to see where >>> it goes against something more complexe. Until I can speek with more >>> objectivity while talking about Guit, I'll only say two thing: Open source >>> rock and thanks for this comparison. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:17 AM, Magno Machado <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> I'm already using GWTP in a project, and what I most like on it is how >>>> easy it is to have a presenter loaded asynchronously, this is done with one >>>> line of code. >>>> >>>> How is it done in Guit? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Gal Dolber <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> http://code.google.com/p/gwtpsamplesinguit/ >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Guit: Elegant, beautiful, modular and *production ready* gwt >>>>> applications. >>>>> >>>>> http://code.google.com/p/guit/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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]<google-web-toolkit%[email protected]> >>>>> . >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Magno Machado Paulo >>>> http://blog.magnomachado.com.br >>>> http://code.google.com/p/emballo/ >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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]<google-web-toolkit%[email protected]> >>>> . >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Christian Goudreau >>> www.arcbees.com >>> >>> -- >>> 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]<google-web-toolkit%[email protected]> >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Guit: Elegant, beautiful, modular and *production ready* gwt >> applications. >> >> http://code.google.com/p/guit/ >> >> >> >> -- >> 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]<google-web-toolkit%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. >> > > > > -- > Christian Goudreau > www.arcbees.com > > -- Christian Goudreau www.arcbees.com -- 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.
