I second the call for reducing compile times and making it more extendable.
The slow compile/link times are a major impediment to development. Some of our developers are in favor of dumping GWT in favor of native javascript toolkits because the slow dev mode and compile/link times are impeding their ability to iterate quickly. I still think the ability to use Java testing and refactoring tools makes it worth it, but as our code base grows the tradeoffs are getting more painful. We have run into a number of situations where we wound up forking the code in order to work around classes that weren't using interfaces and weren't designed with extensibility in mind. Some of the newer classes are better designed, but there's still a lot of fixup to do. I hope this gets some attention going forward. Another request is to keep the separation between client and server clean. We are building on top of a mixture of legacy Apache as well as Java (jetty) servers. Our ability to use GWT as a client only library has been critical to our success. Any move to tie the front end more tightly to a specific back end technology will make it harder for us to use. -- 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/-/SvLl8kBz3D8J. 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.
