As everyone already said, gwt places/activities is a history management implementation, gwt at the moment doesn't include any mvp implementation. That doesn't mean that the way to go with mvp is by-hand. I am sure that if in the future gwt would include GWTP or any other framework everyone would use it, you just need a little push from google.
Mvp is a great pattern, but is incredibly full of boilerplate code. If anyone used DI before without guice(or any other) I think the case is the same. Doing hand-written mvp will generate small mvp frameworks on each developer/company, cause I asume you actually don't like to write boilerplate code. That's not a bad thing, but we won't have any standard till google says what framework to use or they make their own. Don't get me wrong, if I start using gwt today the first thing I'll try is activities/places and I won't touch any framework until I really need it, same thing happened to me with appengine and jdo, I really hated learning and using jdo but I had to try it, google's tutorial used it... then I found objectify and slim3 and my life was much much easier. Anyway, I bring another player to the table: guit<http://code.google.com/p/guit/> You are all invited to try it! Regards On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Thomas Broyer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wednesday, April 27, 2011 4:55:06 PM UTC+2, tanteanni wrote: >> >> Is it possible (or probably preferable) to "aid" the implementation of MVP >> by a MVP-Framework (like those mentioned above)? or would this raise some >> conflicts with gwt's places and ativities? >> > > GWTP and Mvp4g both do much more than just "MVP" (because you really don't > need any kind of framework for MVP: just create two interfaces, two > implementations of those interfaces and you're done; the hard part is the > lifecycle of your "components", and how you "plug" them together, and this > is where activities, GWTP and Mvp4g chime in), so they indeed "conflict" > with the activities framework (that's the deal with frameworks vs. > toolkits/libraries). > In the end, you'll have to choose one of them three. My choice is > activities, but YMMV, and both GWTP and Mvp4g are very good frameworks (made > by really nice and skillful guys). It's just that I don't like frameworks, > and "activities" is so lightweight that it's hardly more than a toolkit: if > there's a part of it you don't like, you can very easily replace it with > your own, because you still have to do the bootstrap yourself (contrary to > most said "frameworks"; see, with GWTP your EntryPoint is almost empty, and > with Mvp4g you don't even have your own EntryPoint!) > > -- > 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. > -- 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]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
