Thomas Broyer reached out to get vector versions of the original GWT Logo
so I'm going to just throw my copies into the community before they are
lost. As far as I remember, these logos were originally created by Michael
Lopez in 2006. I'm pretty confident that the illustrator file I have is
xsiframe is fine if it works. But you'll have to check it because these are
not the normal xs restrictions.
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Unnur Gretarsdottir unn...@google.comwrote:
All google3 projects are being switched to xsiframe in a few weeks
(currently blocked by lack of a Blaze
Awesome. good to know. I need to figure out how it manages to work.
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Chris Conroy con...@google.com wrote:
Actually, it does work.
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Kelly Norton knor...@google.com wrote:
I could be wrong, but I don't think the xsiframe linker
Did I already mention how awesome it is that you fixed this?
awesome!
/kelly
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 5:05 PM, fre...@google.com wrote:
Committed in r8509
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=8509
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/730802/show
--
If you
We just helped Philip pick one of the bugs on the list for Q3 to help him
get started with the codebase.
/kelly
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:53 PM, rj...@google.com wrote:
Where did this change come from? What's motivating it?
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/738801/diff/1/2
File
Got screenshot?
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 4:41 PM, j...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: jlabanca,
Description:
Nicer style for the mobile parts of the sample.
More useful mobile page stack.
Added edit/save for expense entries.
Please review this at
No, if two modules with the same name load, it's only through luck:
Here's one example of why:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/browse/trunk/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/linker/IFrameTemplate.js#90
/kel
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 5:50 PM, John LaBanca jlaba...@google.com
Hi Jim,
We were actually kind of late finding out that extensions would not be
enabled on the Mac, so we didn't get a chance to change out the screenshots.
In fact, extensions have been turned on in the Mac Dev Channel for the past
month but they had to turn them off briefly for the Chrome Beta
Index: distro-source/mac/src/libswt-webkit-carbon-3235.jnilib
That was a prebuilt version of the modified swt library we built. It can
definitely go.
/kel
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Scott Blum sco...@google.com wrote:
Strange, I'd have thought we'd have pulled that file from /tools.
Me, I'm holding out for the 'comefrom' statement.
/kel
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 9:31 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
+1 Freeland. You may then also like the planned private goto, which
goes somewhere but it doesn't tell you where it's gone.
On Tuesday, November 17, 2009, Freeland
fwiw, I've never found myself sorting GWT distros but I do find myself
wanting to uniquely identify them all the time. Why do you think people will
be so eager to ignore part of the label? I would actually be surprised if
any form of naming fixes the few incidences of the conversation you mention.
setting
an ill-considered trend for JSO functors.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Freeland Abbott fabb...@google.com
Date: Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 9:55 PM
Subject: Re: Review: JsArrays patch
To: Kelly Norton knor...@google.com
Cc: Scott Blum sco...@google.com, Bruce Johnson br
Few things:
Overall, I'd like to be more conservative landing things in JavaScriptObject
for a couple of reasons: (1) It's hard to take a mulligan with these because
of their constraints (2) there is always a trivial work around to create
application specific subclasses (with toll free casting).
FWIW, in another little project I used a pattern for this that avoids
implementation inheritance that I call self-delegation.
Here's an example:
/** Not put API, but it includes the impl for al getters and setters for all
types. **/
final class JsArray extends JavaScriptObject {
...
public int
I was typing up an email and then Joel's response arrived covering much of
what I was typing, so I'll just add to his points:
The first thing I was going to mention is that, as I understand it, pyjamas
loads modules by injecting a script tag and then running a timer to
determine when the module
Heh, I think I always have an opinion on Timers :-)
I think Timers should allow 0ms delays and I think we should also have a
mechanism for what is commonly called invokeLater. Here's why:
Timers should accept 0ms
I do think allowing 0ms is kind of wrong because browsers clamp at 10ms-15ms
and
LGTM and the cruft is gone from my trivial app.
thanks,
/kel
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Lex Spoon sp...@google.com wrote:
Kelly,
Can you review the patch I attached to issue 3121?
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=3121
In particular, does it eliminate the
Everone clamps timers now. Chrome launched without a clamp, but even
without the clamp setTimeout(..., 0) enqueued an event onto the
message loop. There were some old mozilla browsers that didn't yield
on setTimeout of 0, but you would probably have to look pretty deep in
the archives to find
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 8:18 AM, Bruce Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 7:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To be honest, I wish we would start creating larger .gwt.xml files and
make each one that exists inheritable.
I agree. It was a rookie decision we made early on
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 10:10 AM, Bruce Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey, that's a nice visualization! Using a nice view like that, we can
probably iterate in early 2009 to clean up a lot of this.
Ok, but I do want to create useragent.UserAgent now as I selfishly need the
ability to
Yes lgtm to cameron's change, sorry I ignored email for a while.
On Nov 10, 2008 6:08 PM, Lex Spoon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Kelly Norton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For iframe loading, Came...
Can I consider that an LGTM?
However, I am wondering how
Ray C.,
No worries. We are planning to land a pure java code path through
event dispatch code. My real objection in the review, which Emily and
Ray forced out of me, is that we have never enumerated goals and use
cases around sharing GWT-java code with other Java contexts. I want to
make sure we
I just wanted people to be aware of this. I've changed the settings in
our project to always CC the code review comments to this list.
/kel
--
If you received this communication by mistake, you are entitled to one
free ice cream cone on me. Simply print out this email including all
relevant
Have you considered disabling those tests only for the platforms where they
are flaky?
/kel
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 1:26 PM, John LaBanca [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If we already comment out some methods, then LGTM. Joel doesn't think it
matters, and I just wanted to be consistent not realizing
24 matches
Mail list logo
