I think it's important for folks to understand that they're not writing in Java and to appreciate the times when it truly feels like they are because the GWT team has done such an excellent job. When a thread like this happens I call it "the book of Job" because the end user often times doesn't know what the god(s) have had to face in creating the world and keeping it going. GWT is the first web based technology that I've used that actually makes sense. For web based apps, one can never be removed entirely from understanding http, html, css, and java script but the GWT team has certainly taken us a long way in that direction.
On Jan 11, 8:55 am, Olivier Gérardin <[email protected]> wrote: > GWT had to do I18N the way it's done precisely because of the > constraints imposed by Javascript compilation and the choices made for > optimization, in particular the notion of "permutation" which requires > that every possible combination of browser and target language is > compiled separately. > > Instead of "reinventing the wheel", GWT designers chose to build a > generic an extensible way to implement this (deferred binding) and use > it extensively, including for i18n. So once you get how deferred > binding works, you'll see that it's all very consistent. > > -- > Olivier > > On Jan 11, 10:14 am, Aladdin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > First I wanna say that I love GWT. But I feel that GWT sometimes > > reinvent the wheels or try to create new tools that we need to relearn > > instead of relaying on Java & other Java's open source projects. > > > UiBinder and I18N. Java already has a Resource Bundle feature. > > > I think Google is confused about the language, they built GWT on Java > > because of Java's popularity, but I want to say that is nothing that > > specially about the syntax, the main important are the libraries. > > e.g , GWT.log ! why they reinventing logging ! > > > After 10 years experience in Java, I have to relearn how to do I18N !! > > why ? > > > So my advice to Google, give us Java, i.e , the platform, with > > current model and the core library. Not the syntax. I rather write in > > PHP with the same Java library, than write in Java with a new > > framework ! > > > What you guys think ?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- 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.
