Thanks David. I'll say that before posting anything on here I spent hours searching through these groups and found a lot of people looking for some kind of reuse very much related to this same kind of problem - but nothing especially helpful in the way of a solution... It almost seems like it should be doable with just a little bit more the compiler side or something.
Is the compiler source available? I have looked briefly into linkers, but I fear that the big hangup for us is really the base stuff which probably isn't addressable from the linkers. Any advice on somewhere I can follow up with those kinds of interests? -Brian On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 3:08 PM, David Chandler <[email protected]>wrote: > Fair enough, bkardell. GWT cannot optimize code that cannot be > compiled together. If it's a requirement for you that each widget is a > separate JavaScript, then you'd have to compile a few and see whether > the GWT optimizations such as dead code elimination outweigh the > effects of compiling multiple times the commonly used parts of the > shared libraries. > > GWT's sweet spot, IMHO, is building rich Internet applications that > feel like a desktop app but run in a browser. GWT can break the app > into multiple pieces using code splitting (runAsync), but if the > pieces aren't part of the same compile as in your case, that won't > help. > > /dmc > > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 2:31 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Ok, a few things. > > > > 1) Thanks for the response. > > 2) Please have some patience, I'm really trying my best to communicate > > what seems to me a perfectly rational question that I feel like I am > > directing at exactly the right people. If I come across unclearly, I > > will be more than happy to try to clarify. > > 3) The examples that both @clintjhill and I gave specified that these > > are disparate code bases that _can not_ be compiled together. It is > > possible to specify things that can and can't be used, even an API - > > but they aren't owned by the same entity... That's really why I tried > > to use "something like" iGoogle as an example because it's sort of the > > most analogous thing I can think of... It's a Mashup situation where > > there can potentially be many, many components shoved together from > > disparate (but trusted) sources. If I recall, I think that the gadget > > container actually _does_ provide some common API for tabs and rpc and > > things... I'm not sure if that's re-incuded every time, but that's the > > idea - do we have to reinclude it every time? I think that > > @clintjhill's example is more literal/concise so if you are more > > comfortable with that, the only addition I would like to make is that > > it is perhaps a little too small (not just repeated, but repeated > > potentially many, many times) to demonstrate my concern.... > > 4) Note the end of the question above "... if the GWT team had such a > > problem at hand - would they choose GWT" is followed immediately by > > "... and if so, how would they deal with the implications spelled out > > above?" > > > > I just want to say... There are languages and tools that I use, that I > > _love_ in fact, which would just be the wrong choice if that's not the > > problem space that they are focused on solving. I think, if I had no > > desire to use GWT - why would I be asking...right? > > > > -- > > 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. > > > > > > > > -- > David Chandler > Developer Programs Engineer, Google Web Toolkit > http://googlewebtoolkit.blogspot.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. > > -- 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.
