Re: Saving data on the server
Thanks mate! Some good info there. For now, im going to stick with the serialize to file, just because I'm a long way from actually doing something practical with the data, and because i can quickly see what changes I have made. The good thing about RPC implementation is I can just swap out the method for something substantial later on. I guess that was the intention at least. /David On 14 Nov, 00:30, Brett Thomas brettptho...@gmail.com wrote: The get and set functions are called getters and setters - they are part of the javabean specification:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaBean I'm guessing the XML library you are using requires java objects to be defined as javabeans. I've seen a couple other libraries that do that too - not sure why they work that way. For the bigger picture, that all depends on your server setup. If you're just experimenting, I'd suggest using GWT with Google App Engine, and storing data via hibernate. Google has a good tutorial for using GWT with app engine/hibernate. I think a database is almost alwasy easier than serializing objects to a file. To your point about changing your data model: I've found that app engine is really bad for this. There isn't (I don't think) a simple way to delete all objects of this class out of the box. When I was just experimenting with app engine, I found it easier to just create new class definitions than modify existing classes. Good luck learning GWT! Brett On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 2:38 PM, David Cox cox.spir...@gmail.com wrote: So, i managed to solve my own problem again, but I'm no 100% on how i did it. What i did was remove all my functions in the class and then re-added them with the create getter and setter for private String Then i made sure that the variable was set using the actual setter function. ie: this.setTitle(Title). I also had other function in the class. Like myfucntion(String title, int counter) or something like that. Origionaly i have stuff like this.Title = title. I had to change these to this.setTitle(title). Even though all the setTitle function does exaclty: this.title = title. For some reason this fixes it. as far as i can tell, the rules for successful xml serialisation as as such: 1. The each variable you want serialised must have a set command called that has the same name with a set prefix 2. this function must be called at least once or that particular variable will not be searilised (once it is called though, you can then go back to using direct methods like this.Title = title. ) 3. each variable MUST also have a public function wiht the same name and a get prefix. It took me ages to work this out, and i would love it if someone out there could explain why. My only guess is that it does have 1 convenient feature, and that is, you can actually use this to determine which variables will be seen in the resulting serialised XML, but you can still work happily with all the other variables in an object (like counters and states) and not have them appear in the output. Nice one. Just wish i found a tutuorial out there that explained this to me from the start. Am still interested to hear what others do. /David -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To post to this group, send email to google-web-tool...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-web-toolkit%2Bunsubs cr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To post to this group, send email to google-web-tool...@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.
Re: Saving data on the server
So, i managed to solve my own problem again, but I'm no 100% on how i did it. What i did was remove all my functions in the class and then re-added them with the create getter and setter for private String Then i made sure that the variable was set using the actual setter function. ie: this.setTitle(Title). I also had other function in the class. Like myfucntion(String title, int counter) or something like that. Origionaly i have stuff like this.Title = title. I had to change these to this.setTitle(title). Even though all the setTitle function does exaclty: this.title = title. For some reason this fixes it. as far as i can tell, the rules for successful xml serialisation as as such: 1. The each variable you want serialised must have a set command called that has the same name with a set prefix 2. this function must be called at least once or that particular variable will not be searilised (once it is called though, you can then go back to using direct methods like this.Title = title. ) 3. each variable MUST also have a public function wiht the same name and a get prefix. It took me ages to work this out, and i would love it if someone out there could explain why. My only guess is that it does have 1 convenient feature, and that is, you can actually use this to determine which variables will be seen in the resulting serialised XML, but you can still work happily with all the other variables in an object (like counters and states) and not have them appear in the output. Nice one. Just wish i found a tutuorial out there that explained this to me from the start. Am still interested to hear what others do. /David -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To post to this group, send email to google-web-tool...@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.
Re: Saving data on the server
The get and set functions are called getters and setters - they are part of the javabean specification: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaBean I'm guessing the XML library you are using requires java objects to be defined as javabeans. I've seen a couple other libraries that do that too - not sure why they work that way. For the bigger picture, that all depends on your server setup. If you're just experimenting, I'd suggest using GWT with Google App Engine, and storing data via hibernate. Google has a good tutorial for using GWT with app engine/hibernate. I think a database is almost alwasy easier than serializing objects to a file. To your point about changing your data model: I've found that app engine is really bad for this. There isn't (I don't think) a simple way to delete all objects of this class out of the box. When I was just experimenting with app engine, I found it easier to just create new class definitions than modify existing classes. Good luck learning GWT! Brett On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 2:38 PM, David Cox cox.spir...@gmail.com wrote: So, i managed to solve my own problem again, but I'm no 100% on how i did it. What i did was remove all my functions in the class and then re-added them with the create getter and setter for private String Then i made sure that the variable was set using the actual setter function. ie: this.setTitle(Title). I also had other function in the class. Like myfucntion(String title, int counter) or something like that. Origionaly i have stuff like this.Title = title. I had to change these to this.setTitle(title). Even though all the setTitle function does exaclty: this.title = title. For some reason this fixes it. as far as i can tell, the rules for successful xml serialisation as as such: 1. The each variable you want serialised must have a set command called that has the same name with a set prefix 2. this function must be called at least once or that particular variable will not be searilised (once it is called though, you can then go back to using direct methods like this.Title = title. ) 3. each variable MUST also have a public function wiht the same name and a get prefix. It took me ages to work this out, and i would love it if someone out there could explain why. My only guess is that it does have 1 convenient feature, and that is, you can actually use this to determine which variables will be seen in the resulting serialised XML, but you can still work happily with all the other variables in an object (like counters and states) and not have them appear in the output. Nice one. Just wish i found a tutuorial out there that explained this to me from the start. Am still interested to hear what others do. /David -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To post to this group, send email to google-web-tool...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.comgoogle-web-toolkit%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com . For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To post to this group, send email to google-web-tool...@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.
Saving data on the server
Hi, I'm kinda new to GWT. Anyway, I managed to perform an RPC call to the server for an array of objects, each. The object class (with a few strings and a few ints) is defined on the client side, but the server seems happy to reference to it. But now i want to have the server write (and later read) the data to file. I have been experimenting with Serialising Java Objects as XML from the server side. However the server seems to only write each object in the array, but not the data that is actually IN the object (ie: added by the user) ?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8? java version=1.6.0_18 class=java.beans.XMLDecoder array class=com.mysite.client.myObject length=3 void index=0 object class=com.mysite.client.myObject/ /void void index=1 object class=com.mysite.client.myObject/ /void void index=2 object class=com.mysite.client.myObject/ /void /array /java Even when I just reference one object: like myObject test = new myObject(abc, 100, 10, blahblah); the xml output is just the class definition. I have looked at many example online and they say that i should see the data in the object as well. Perhaps because the class is client side and special in a gwt sort of way, this is not possible? Probably I am doing something silly. Probably, even, gwt has better and more standardised ways saving and retrieving data on the server side. What simple methods do others do? I really like the sound of using serialisable xml because it seems to mean that I don't have to update the save/load routine when I update and develop the class. But maybe its better to just put it all in a DB. /David. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To post to this group, send email to google-web-tool...@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.
