Thanks for reply Stevko. Meaning big javascript verses bunch of html pages.
would it be great if some we combine these ? In module html file we load entire java script, why not small chunk of javascript just to render that page? - for outside it is just a html page. Will multiple modules serves the purpose? May be I can open different module's html page with "window.open". One GWT module for page ? - do-able - not sure. Let me try. Only compromise is client is driving the page flow not server, at least one step forward. On Aug 6, 1:08 pm, Andy Stevko <[email protected]> wrote: > You may want to investigate other toolkit frameworks that fit your wants > better. > > One that comes to mind is Closure which, I have read, allows for the > creation of pages in both the browser and server via the use of templates. > For clients that have a fast client, the browser loads javascript and > renders the page locally. For clients that have a slow client (think phone > browser), the server renders the html page and dumps the html only. > > http://code.google.com/closure/ > > On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 7:57 AM, dreamer <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Magno Machado Paulo. > > You are suggesting to reverse the calls. Meaning first call RPC to > > load model then gwt async to load > > view&presenter. second gwt async can be called only on success of > > first rpc for model. to make sure model is available in all > > conditions. > > > So there are two async server calls no matter how we do it. more over > > code splitting > > is not transparent like individual pages, where you send which ever > > page you want filled with data to client. > > > We should have flexibility to serve the page either from client or > > server, so that we can get advantage of both worlds. > > Every thing on client including decision making may not fit well for > > enterprise class solutions as all Enterprise resources > > are at server, which are well protected etc. > > > It would be awesome if we get best of both worlds. > > > -Venu > >http://schoolk12.appspot.com/ > > > On Aug 6, 3:07 am, Magno Machado <[email protected]> wrote: > > > You could use your server to fetch the data and embed it on the host > > page. > > > Then when the GWT code is loaded, it can read the data and render the > > screen > > > without making a new request on the server... For exemple: > > > User requesthttp://your-app.com/?page=contactlist > > > The server receives the request, fetch a list of contacts on the DB and > > > write it on the hostpage > > > The host page is sent back to the browser > > > The browser loads the host page, which in turn load your GWT code > > > In your entrypoint, you read what is the current page, make an async call > > to > > > load the javascript for that page > > > Instead of making a RPC call to load the data, you can read the data > > already > > > embeded on the host page > > > > Now the user clicks on an "Edit contact" link on the page > > > The browser will send a get request forhttp:// > > your-app.com/?page=editcontact&contactid=1 > > > > I don't know how mobile browsers cache pages (maybe for the sake of disk > > > space, they don't?), but hopefully all the JS will get cached on the > > browser > > > once they're loaded for the first time > > > > On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 12:49 AM, dreamer <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the reply Magno Machado Paulo. > > > > > Code splitting is a console, documentation is telling on main page, > > > > for every event click where > > > > ever we need to load composite, suggested to use GWT.runAsync. > > > > > But the problem is I ended up getting Async call within Another Async > > > > call, one for loading composite, on success another > > > > async RPC call to get Model, for some reason even main page is not > > > > that fast, in fact I observed some slow. > > > > This is pure implementation issue. > > > > > Conceptually, why async call to load another page, why don't we submit > > > > entire page and get fresh page along with model applied to view on > > > > server itself like jsp? > > > > Why don't I use jsp? - I want to develop like a swing app with ajax > > > > capability and drag and drop designer. > > > > > On Aug 5, 7:27 pm, Magno Machado <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > What it your app read a particular parameter on the URL that tell the > > app > > > > > what "page" should be rendered, then everytime you need to display a > > new > > > > > page, you generate a get request with the parameter for the page you > > wish > > > > to > > > > > display. > > > > > > If you use runAsync on each page, the browser will always load only > > the > > > > JS > > > > > for the current page, not the whole app code > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:50 PM, dreamer < > > [email protected] > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > How about if it is possible to build Rich Internet Page (RIP), in a > > > > > > more productive tool like GWT designer and eclipse plug etc > > > > > > and server serving these pages using some web framework ? > > > > > > > My friend asked why don't you hand code html+ajax, sure that is > > > > > > perfect, if that magic is possible with GWT, how productive it > > would > > > > > > be? > > > > > > > What is wrong with GWT RIA apps, Problem is I don't see pages, I > > see > > > > > > entire app,comes onto browser and my server becomes dummy. > > > > > > > What is wrong server being dummy? because Browser is supposed to be > > > > > > thin and you can use it on 10 devices in single day. > > > > > > > You open browser on cell phone, laptop,desktop where not, still use > > > > > > the same app. so application can not be one big bundle. > > > > > > > It needs to be page at a time. Ok, then it is not RIA app, then it > > is > > > > > > RIP. > > > > > > > So why I don't I settle for a RIP (Rich Internet Page) ? - looks > > cool > > > > > > to me. Is it possible to build using my favorite GWT+AppEngine. ? > > > > > > > Stay tuned, I will Let you know > > > > > > > ---Dreamer > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > -- > > > > > Magno Machado Paulohttp://blog.magnomachado.com.brhttp:// > > > > code.google.com/p/emballo/ > > > > > -- > > > > 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. > > > > -- > > > Magno Machado Paulohttp://blog.magnomachado.com.brhttp:// > > code.google.com/p/emballo/ > > > -- > > 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. > > -- > -- A. Stevko > =========== > "If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough." M. > Andretti -- 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.
