Good idea but not usefull to me.
I never had any problem with the Java Syntax. The last thing we need now it
s an abstraction on top of Java.
That s my 2cent.

2011/11/12 Stephen Haberman <[email protected]>

> Hey,
>
> The xtend language [1] had a new release last week; they purport to be a
> "better Java" syntax but interestingly compile-down to Java source code,
> not Java byte code. Which means something like GWT can read the .java files
> and not care that the original language was not actually Java.
>
> As much as I like GWT, I will readily admit the aging Java syntax is not
> one of it's strengths, so have been actively looking for alternatives. Here
> are my thoughts on xtend/the syntax problem in general.
>
> * xtend itself seems kind of flaky--I could not get it to work by using
> their update site into my existing Eclipse installation. However, their
> update site has a long, complex list of features to choose, so I may have
> just choose the wrong one.
>
> * They also have a new distribution, which I did get to work, but only
> after deleting some code from their out-of-the-box sample project that for
> some reason wasn't compiling. It seems like I had to do a couple of clean
> builds before I finally saw things kick into gear and make some .java
> source files.
>
> These two points being said, it's a new project, so I have no problem with
> some rough edges. That being said, it also looks like:
>
> * If you run a junit test and it fails, and click on the failed method,
> Eclipse takes you to the generated .java file to show the failure. The
> generated .java files aren't necessarily ugly, but it seems like the point
> of a new syntax is to not have to look at the old one.
>
> * You cannot currently set debug points in .xtend files, you have to go to
> the generated .java files, set a debug point there. The Eclipse debugger
> will also step you through the generated Java code instead of the original
> .xtend code while you're debugging.
>
> So, this seems a little bit more odd to me. Perhaps it's something they
> can fix as the project matures, but I would really prefer the Eclipse
> tooling to use the original .xtend source files for debugging/etc.
>
> Applying xtend to GWT, it would probably result in the same issue--any
> errors/stack traces/debugging/etc. would be reported against the generated
> .java files, as GWT wouldn't know they should map back to whatever original
> .xtend source file.
>
> Which, I dunno, I guess might be fine to get a better syntax, but I don't
> think is ideal. So I'm still looking for more suitable "Java.next"
> contender that could integrate with GWT.
>
> In that regard, my current favorite is the scala-gwt project, which I've
> been helping out with a little bit. It is in the same early stages, so has
> a number of rough corners, but once you get it setup, doesn't have the
> .java vs. .xtend problem. Debugging happens in your .scala files, etc.
> Which is pretty sweet. The project just released a new 0.1-m3 milestone, so
> I'd encourage anyone here who's interested to try it out and offer feedback.
>
> - Stephen
>
> [1]: http://www.eclipse.org/Xtext/xtend/
>
> --
> 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/-/wEF-0Vidxn8J.
> 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.
>



-- 

GWT API for  non Java based platforms
http://www.emitrom.com/ <http://code.google.com/p/gwt4air/>
http://gwt4touch.appspot.com/
http://gwt4flex.appspot.com/ <http://gwt4touch.appspot.com/>
http://code.google.com/p/gwt4air/
http://www.gwt4air.appspot.com/

-- 
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.

Reply via email to