-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 1) Has largely been a non-issue for us in practice, since we use UIBinder. We devs take a mockup from our designer, extract chunks of HTML from it, and parameterize them into UIBinder widgets.
We end up with an app whose DOM structure is 99% the same as the designer's mockup, which means we can use the mockup's CSS without any modifications. For devs like us that would prefer to stay as removed from CSS as possible to concentrate on other things, this is a huge win. That said, if styling isn't important - and it isn't for a good chunk of internal CRUD-oriented apps - it's not that big a deal if 'view source' shows "ugly" nested tables or not. On 10/10/2012 04:13 PM, Shaun Tarves wrote: > There is no doubt that what GWT does, it's really good at. However, > some things that I've found GWT really isn't good at: > > 1) Producing clean HTML > > The structure of GWT "page views," especially with GWT widgets, is > really poor. The DOM gets bloated with lots of extra elements that > are used for focus and positioning. There are ways around this, but > I feel like I'm constantly fighting with GWT to generate HTML > structure on my terms. > > For example, some of the most lauded constructs in GWT are the > Cell-based widgets (CellTable, and CellList, specifically). With > CellLists, you are stuck with divs. There's no way around it. So > that means if you want to make a good data model-backed list and > render it as a UL with LIs, you're SOL. > > 2) The history mechanism is really powerful, but it's important to > get your URL structure correct from the start. The built-in history > token parser is a little too rigid in that it forces the first part > of your URLs to be of the form xxxx:yyy and then anything you want > after that. When you dive deeper into GWT, you'll understand the > limitations of the PlaceHistoryMapper and why you might want to > avoid the tokenizers and write your own parser. > > 3) The GWT CSS compiler doesn't understand any CSS3 attributes. > Also, browser-specific attributes (such as the * hack for IE) throw > warnings on compiling. It's not really GWT's fault (it's a Java > compiler issue), but be aware nonetheless. > > Just a few things to keep in mind. > > On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 1:53:26 PM UTC-4, Charlie Youakim > wrote: > > Great posts. I am truly gracious of all the responses to this > question I posted. I feel like we have made the right move going > in this direction. > > On Wednesday, October 10, 2012 1:28:05 PM UTC-4, Joseph Lust > wrote: > > *Praise* > > I think it is best to assert that /GWT is to Javascript what Scala > is to Java/. GWT is a higher level web framework. Sure, your devs > can learn every browser quirk and go bare metal, writing verbose > code. But they can also just focus on the higher level of logic, > interactions and reusability. > > Put simply, the GWT framework allows you to carry out nearly every > best practice in web application design, and do so in a robust, > automated manner. Sure, you can sprite your images, minify and > obfuscate your CSS, combine your JS files, then minimize them, then > run them through the Closure compiler, then gzip them, and repeat > for each language you plan to i18n for. Or you can just hit compile > in GWT. And you can unit test that process as well. Awesome! > > Coming from being a script kiddie in 1997, having done PHP > frameworks, C# & ASP.Net, and raw JS with ExtJs, there is no better > way to create RIA’s than GWT. I used to hate my life when I fought > with debuggers in FF and raw HTML code to get a blasted form to > come up right. Now I just put a few UiBinder XML tags in with > something like gwt-bootstrap and it is done and pretty. Life saver. > Why would you do it any other way? > > And, to note what you can do with this. My employer, a large > financial institution, uses GWT as their standard inhouse > technology for enterprise web applications. One team just finished > a 400 screen application and I’m currently working on a bleeding > edge, HTML5/canvas based flagship product which is 200kLOC strong. > GWT makes these applications, their rapid turnaround, and very high > level of quality possible. > > *Terms and Conditions* > > This is not for script kiddies. You should have a good grasp of > OO, Java, and JS. GWT itself is a bit dogmatic. This means it > requires competent developers. Once they read all the docs on the > Google Dev pages, they’ll be in good shape. Still, becoming a > serious GWTer is not a weekend effort. Thus, if you want to create > a simple blog, stick with PHP and WP, but if you want a highly > optimized, complex web application, go with GWT. > > Sincerely, > > Joseph > > -- 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/-/Wysu0gYQN3MJ. > 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. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQdfrQAAoJEMPs4oOavcuslTYH/1yjJw7zpsyipi1Yxw97pm5X cfav6naCJdT6aveb+U6HIlHe65GPlMApHAURTOlAIztFxqfTLdJDdS+c14WWP6eN uKz3FVknvtQP/rJ9dT6wXdy3GQx0IfWF/afU/Exxf6yZrp0tzFF+V+U/PJzTPZG3 uSA6+PETVBwcgDzFK0Avn5W+DnCFAIyOuxnF9dQsbC3LOxgFDpQcSJgmd6zSbbYS zjg9pHykIXRimwECiiceNO72HDaeJpMOoUvnXrNzoYcxwfv3+IZym2DQJeSHalXS sDtap9GKHPM5OXG6z+dtgYj1KljWrQAa2bnJ+NSF5OO24H9wF2+1sDaI7LNEmxA= =2fiv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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.
