On Thursday, September 29, 2011 8:02:11 PM UTC+2, jchimene wrote: > > On 09/29/2011 06:05 AM, Bart wrote: > > Because Java does not have compiler flags like, it is suggested to use > > static (boolean) contants with if expressions instead. The Java > > compiler is even required to remove any dead code that results from > > such constructs. > > > > In our development we have a number of these kind of compiler flags, > > where the developer can choose the flags by including one or more > > specific jars in the class path. This works very well for normal Java > > code. However, for GWT client code, the GWT compiler makes it hard to > > use them, as it requires the source code for these constants, as well > > as an explicit inherit and gwt.xml definition. > > > > In my opinion, the GWT compiler should not actually require any source > > code for these constructs, as it could simply extract the constant's > > value from the class file and replace the reference to the constants > > with its value. > > > > Is there any simpler way to handle compiler flags in GWT client code? > > > > I think the answer to your question is going to depend on why you need > compiler flags. > For example, some might say use one or more of the following: (1) > assert; (2) inheritance; (3) Gin. > (4) deferred binding (and choosing the right gwt.xml to pass to the compiler)
FYI, Google Apache Wave does (4); and that's what GWT suggests using (look at all the properties you can set in a gwt.xml: stacktrace emulation, logging level, logging handlers, CssResource obfuscation, ClientBundle resource inlining, etc.) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/inJkH-qAYWgJ. 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.
