(d) no release of GWT has ever broken SmartGWT. We don't rely on much from GWT other than Java->JavaScript translation, so there is little room for something to break.
(c) This may refer to breakage from customizations like modifying a component's DOM or overriding internals. In SmartGWT we have documented extension points, and if they break, we consider it a bug and fix it (e) We provide nightly builds at smartclient.com/builds, so there is never a delay. (a), (b) [performance stuff] We focus on optimizing for enterprise applications, where first-time-ever page load is not much of a concern because the users repeatedly return to the app and use it for longer sessions. Similarly we focus on reducing trips to the server and/or database since this is usually the bottleneck in an enterprise application. A deeper discussion of this is in the SmartGWT QuickStart Guide, "Evaluating SmartGWT" chapter. In a nutshell: - your experience with Sencha breakage doesn't apply to SmartGWT - carefully consider what will actually drive performance for end users. If you heavily optimize the wrong thing, your users will have a slow application. On Sunday, September 16, 2012 10:26:02 AM UTC-7, Andrei wrote: > > I prefer the third option: I don't use either of them. I build very > complex user interfaces, and so far I never regretted going with pure GWT. > Here are a few advantages of this option: > > (a) Much smaller compiled code size. This also means faster compile times > for developers and faster page load times for users. > > (b) Better performance. I had 3 years of experience with Sencha. Their > widgets look nice (why we chose them in the first place), but in some > complex UIs with lots of data you start to notice the lag relative to pure > GWT. Remember that showcase widgets usually represent a very simple use > case. > > (c) Easier customizations. The simpler the widget, the easier it is to > modify it as you need. There is a lower probability of breaking something. > > (d) There is a lower probability that the next release of a library would > break your code. I remember how much pain we had with Sencha's updates > (2.0, 2.1, etc.) I hope it's much better now as Sencha moved closer to pure > GWT implementation of their widgets. > > (e) Faster updates. Once a new feature is available in GWT, you can use it > right away. With libraries you have to wait until their updates. > > I suggest that you use one of these libraries in two cases: > > 1. Your knowledge of CSS is not great, so you want a professional look for > your app out of the box. > > 2. You see some widgets in these libraries that you absolutely must use, > and you don't want to spend your time building them in pure GWT. > > P.S. Don't let GWT Designer drive your choice of a library. Once you learn > GWT, you may end up never using the Designer. I find it much easier and > faster to build new views in Ui:Binder, and then simply hit a refresh > button in a browser to see how my page looks like. > > -- 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/-/J5PA5KI8sSUJ. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
