Myles, Help me to understand what you are saying, because I am getting the sense that there is still a disconnect... If anyone feels that they can help facilitate this conversation, please jump in...
Let's take the simplest possible case that I was describing above where what I'm trying to download the whole WT part of GWT just once and still use GWT to develop further small, 1 or two widget project that just reuses it rather than recompiling the whole "JRE/WT" part, which can account for a pretty big percentage (97% or better) of the code in a compile of 1 or two widgets. You are saying, I think, is that I can just turn off the optimization and then viola, it's done. Is that right? First - do you have any example of this? I've tried several things to even get the full JRE/WT part to spit out, but I'm not sure how... And then if it is, it is exposed appropriately? I think it won't be. You'd need something like GWT exporter - only for the actual _GWT_ code... right? Further though, my addition GWT projects beyond it wouldn't know anything about it unless I can also tell the compiler "don't include this stuff, because it'll be there already - I promise". I think you'd have to do some gyrations to make that work, and I'm not even sure how... I guess one way would be to write JSNI wrappers that would then merely "point" to the stuff exported above - but... I'll just let you think about the implications there as it's ugly to even think about much less write... Additionally I'm not sure if turning optimization "off" is what I want at all... "Optimization" isn't an all or nothing kind of thing - even in GWT out of the box... Any time you talk about optimization, it's subject to the context and what you weigh as important... Right? That's why GWT introduced code-splitting I think... In some cases, it is suboptimal to get the whole thing at once. In the case I am describing, some things that would generally be done as part of optimization could still apply, others not. Throwing out the whole thing, I think, would be a mistake, even if that would work... though, at least it would be a starting point. So... Am I totally missing something obvious? It would be awesome if you could tell me that I was, but I get the feeling that I'm not. -- 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.
