Hey lalit, I will take a look at this further this was and example of how to implement Spring on a previous version and is basically the servlet example class I posted earlier. I will take a look at the newer version of gwt-dispatch to see what else has been included. We were waiting on upgrading but this peaks my interested on upgrading sooner. WebApplication context is just Spring's way of bootstrapping an application context in a web container. What that class does is grab the application context wires in the DispatchServlet so POJOS can be injected in to all the classes it supports. Definitely it is in the spring-web jar but it appears that is the only Spring feature gwt-dispatch project takes advantage of. If you take a look at the ActionHandler and base dispatch classes you don't see any other Springy stuff.
Gwt-dispatch helps us to avoid having to code the separate interfaces. We just code actions, action handlers, and result objects. All the dispatch traffic routes through the one GWT-RPC service that gwt-dispatch implements. All the async workings have to be there but, we get to work on valuable object interactions and avoid ceremonial grunt work which always makes coding more fun. Later, Jas On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 1:12 AM, lalit <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jason, > > I agree that both the approaches are same. But I still have a feeling > that gwtDispatch uses Spring MVC infra to do its job. The code that > you have posted above has WebApplicationContext. Also I looked into > gwtDispatch code and it seems it is using Spring MVC infra. The code I > looked into is here > > http://code.google.com/p/gwt-dispatch/source/browse/src/main/java/net/customware/gwt/dispatch/server/spring/SpringStandardDispatchServlet.java > > Another thing you mentioned in your mail that you do not have to code > two interfaces which looked interesting. If possible can you elaborate > on that? We would like to incorporate that in our approach also if > possible. > > thanks, > > > On Sep 16, 7:15 pm, Jason Hatton <[email protected]> wrote: > > Lalit we are not using Spring MVC. We am using gwt-dispatch and have > > extended that project's dispatch servlet to get the Spring integration. > We > > then added a custom annotation to pick up the appropriate dispatch action > > handler for a particular GWT-RPC on the server side. All of our GWT-RPC > > calls go through this servlet so we avoid the overhead and code bloat of > > having to create the standard GWT-RPC interfaces for every new service > call > > we want to implement. I looked over your example again and they are > pretty > > similar. I like your integration approach with Spring but I prefer > service > > call handling because we don't have to code the two separate RPC > interfaces, > > i.e. the Service and ServiceAsync for every service we want to > implement. > > We just create an new dispatch handler apply an annotation to it and we > are > > off and running. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 11:33 PM, lalit <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Deepak - I have used the following structure > > > SpringApplicationContext, SpringGwtRemoteServiceServlet , > > > PersonServiceImpl go into the server side code. > > > The interfaces PersonService and PersonServiceAsync become part of > > > GWT client side code. > > > > > Regarding wsdl files consumption see the section on JAX-WS here > > >http://www.lalitbhatt.com/tiki-index.php?page=JAX-WSespeciall JAX-WS > > > client side section. This approach uses JAX-WS approach. > > > > > For data binding you can use JAXB. The details can be seen here > > >http://www.lalitbhatt.com/tiki-index.php?page=JAXB. JAX-WS anyway uses > > > it internally. > > > > > Also just a disclaimer, the approach I took is as per Spring4GWT > > > project so it's there idea. > > > > > Jason- I looked into your approach and conceptually they look similar > > > in terms of that you are redirecting the request to Spring MVC > > > infrastructure. IMHO the aprroach I took as per Sping4GWT is better as > > > one does not have to carry the SpringMVC baggage. > > > > > -- > > > 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]><google-web-toolkit%2Bunsubs > [email protected]> > > > . > > > For more options, visit this group at > > >http://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 [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. > > -- 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.
