My rant about GXT:
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit/msg/693cacbce437d08a
The summary: GXT was a waste of $600 and one month of my time.
Please don't emulate GXT.
Jeff
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 5:14 AM, Slava Lovkiy slava.lov...@gmail.com wrote:
I am 100% agree about GXT Api as
I am 100% agree about GXT Api as being not extensible, causing to
produce parallel suite of widgets.
On Sep 30, 3:39 am, Jeff Larsen larse...@gmail.com wrote:
GWT may not have the most perfect API design, but saying GXT is a
design to implement is laughable at best. GXT has just barely enough
I think we often times forget too that folks are producing these
products for us for free. One can always pay for GWT EXT if they
like.
On Sep 28, 12:38 pm, Brett Thomas brettptho...@gmail.com wrote:
Not to mention none of those three things have to do with API Design...
On Tue, Sep 28,
GWT may not have the most perfect API design, but saying GXT is a
design to implement is laughable at best. GXT has just barely enough
good things to make it worth using. BARELY. I keep their crappy
library segregated behind interfaces and wrap all their even types
waiting for the day I can rip
Well, look at the JavaDoc for extended by
com.google.gwt.dom.client.Style.Unit (AKA Style.Unit). I don't think
it's possible to write worse Documentation than that, other than
perhaps writing something that is actively and consistently wrong.
My general experience with reading the GWT JavaDoc is
On Sep 28, 4:29 pm, Greg Dougherty dougherty.greg...@mayo.edu wrote:
Well, look at the JavaDoc for extended by
com.google.gwt.dom.client.Style.Unit (AKA Style.Unit). I don't think
it's possible to write worse Documentation than that, other than
perhaps writing something that is actively and
Not to mention none of those three things have to do with API Design...
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sep 28, 4:29 pm, Greg Dougherty dougherty.greg...@mayo.edu wrote:
Well, look at the JavaDoc for extended by
Have been working with datepicker.. This must be the nth time I think
gosh your component model and API are poorly designed! The compiler is
great sure, but *please* take a look at projects like Ext GWT of how
things should be done the-right-way before you introduce APIs the-
clumsy-way that will
do you have some interesting showcase? :)
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 4:33 PM, dmen dmenou...@gmail.com wrote:
Have been working with datepicker.. This must be the nth time I think
gosh your component model and API are poorly designed! The compiler is
great sure, but *please* take a look at
Don't have the time to back my claims now; hence I said rant. I intend
to write a lengthy blog post about this though. Just for the
datepicker I 'll say that GWT has a separate package counting 10
artifacts compared to just 2 GXT artifacts that are superior in so
many ways.
On Sep 27, 5:38 pm,
ok, i was only curious
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 5:01 PM, dmen dmenou...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't have the time to back my claims now; hence I said rant. I intend
to write a lengthy blog post about this though. Just for the
datepicker I 'll say that GWT has a separate package counting 10
Don't get me wrong however. I am thankful for the whole GWT
contribution (free and open source). Just felt ranting a little.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To post to this group, send email to
I'm in no relationship to GWT-team.
And I'm quite sure no one would take your rant like you don't appreciate
the benefits GWT brings.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 5:09 PM, dmen dmenou...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't get me wrong however. I am thankful for the whole GWT
contribution (free and open
13 matches
Mail list logo
