Thanks, Sami. I'll keep sending reviews to gwtc, and copy you on them --
this stuff needs all the vetting it can get.
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Sami Jaber sami.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
AFAICT, what's happening here is that the layout works properly in the
sense that the tables inside the
Revision: 5902
Author: rj...@google.com
Date: Thu Aug 6 06:00:57 2009
Log: Suppress test failing on Safari 3--inconsistent innerHTML behavior
w/Safari 4 and the rest of the world
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=5902
Modified:
Comment by jdpatterson:
Looking forward to using this. Is there an issue we can track to be
notified when there is something to try out?
For more information:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/wiki/LayoutDesign
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Sven,
I fully support the idea of fixing this issue one way or another, and I'm
pretty strongly in favor of providing an efficient-if-not-pretty
implementation on IE6 (which I believe is what you're proposing as well).
There are two separate issues we need to consider here. The first is exactly
Hello Joel,
thanks for your answer. Yes another permutation has bad impact on
compile time. I only suggested that because than we could still use
the normal ImageResource support in IE7 and only IE6 would stay with
the GIF format if we had a GIF image before. If the user defined a PNG
image we
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Joel Webber j...@google.com wrote:
I fully support the idea of fixing this issue one way or another, and I'm
pretty strongly in favor of providing an efficient-if-not-pretty
implementation on IE6 (which I believe is what you're proposing as well).
There are
UiBinder is awesome!
An extra degree of decoupling, could be done by adding the next stuff
to the UiBinder interface:
public interface UiBinderU, O {
U createAndBindUi(O owner);
public static interface PairU, O{
R getRoot();
O getOwner();
}
PairU, O createAndBindUi();
}
Hi,
Since I was asking for some better IE7 support I might as well budge
in and give my opinion.
For me it is acceptable that the IE6 is slow and leaks memory -
everybody accepts that by now :-).
If the compiler could however detect if transparency is needed than
the whole DirectX filter could
Revision: 5903
Author: jlaba...@google.com
Date: Thu Aug 6 08:09:11 2009
Log: Fixing the testcases parameter to gwt.junit in the test.web.htmlunit
target. They currently point to default.web.tests, which were removed.
Patch by: jlabanca
Review by: jgw (desk)
Reviewers: Dan Rice,
Description:
EnumSetTest has an unused import. This patch removes it.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56803
Affected files:
user/test/com/google/gwt/emultest/java/util/EnumSetTest.java
Index:
Dropping transparency support in IE6 is a bad idea. Too many business
people just still use IE6. Also saying that developers that need
transparent images in IE6 should not use ImageBundle is that good.
When writing my app I don’t want to care where it is running after I
finished it. It should
Submitted at r5896
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Andrés Testi andres.a.te...@gmail.comwrote:
UiBinder is awesome!
An extra degree of decoupling, could be done by adding the next stuff
to the UiBinder interface:
public interface UiBinderU, O {
U createAndBindUi(O owner);
public
LGTM, just one comment on the integration test.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51829/diff/1/3
File
user/test/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/test/RunAsyncMetricsIntegrationTest.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51829/diff/1/3#newcode199
Line 199: }
Check that the event queue is
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:02 AM, David david.no...@gmail.com wrote:
If the compiler could however detect if transparency is needed than
the whole DirectX filter could be avoided. But in reality, we use
transparency all over the place. Most of the transparency is just
binary so a GIF would be
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Sven Brunken s...@extjs.com wrote:
Dropping transparency support in IE6 is a bad idea. Too many business
people just still use IE6. Also saying that developers that need
transparent images in IE6 should not use ImageBundle is that good.
When writing my app I
On 6-Aug-09, at 9:57 AM, John Tamplin wrote:
If the transparency is just binary, then IE6 already supports PNG
transparency, right? Aside from the hassle of detecting if a one-
bit alpha channel will do, I think the J2D libraries we currently
use won't generate one-bit alpha channels
Hi,
Seems similar to the classes provided by gwt-mosaic, see:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51830/patch/2003/2012
vs
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-mosaic/source/browse/branches/GWT-2.0/src/org/gwt/mosaic/ui/client/LayoutComposite.java
or all the other layout panels and classes:
Hi,
I work for gwt-mosaic and implemented an Absolute Javascript Layout
system based on AbsolutePanel and (like SWING) on various
LayoutManagers:
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-mosaic/source/browse/branches/GWT-1.6/src/org/gwt/mosaic/ui/client/layout/LayoutPanel.java
Hi all
I'm sure an official version will appear soon, but in the meantime
I've made a build of the XPCOM OOPHM plugin which seems to work on
FF3.5.2/Win (and also contains untested libs for FF3.5 on Linux 32-
bit) - it's at:
http://www.aisper.com/gwt-oophm/oophm-xpcom-ff35.xpi
No promises, but
Hi,
all this code seems to me similar to the code provided by gwt-mosaic
project:
LayoutPanel:
- http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51830/diff/1/11
-
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-mosaic/source/browse/branches/GWT-2.0/src/org/gwt/mosaic/ui/client/layout/LayoutPanel.java
LayoutComposite:
-
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Stephen step...@aisper.com wrote:
I'm sure an official version will appear soon, but in the meantime
I've made a build of the XPCOM OOPHM plugin which seems to work on
FF3.5.2/Win (and also contains untested libs for FF3.5 on Linux 32-
bit) - it's at:
Reviewers: Ray Ryan,
Message:
@Ray, does this take care of the issue you mentioned in IRC?
Description:
This patch does away with the need to write a callback just to be able
to discard the proxy object once the implementation has been loaded.
Please review this at
George,
The main difference between this layout system and that in gwt-mosaic (or
ext, for that matter), is that it performs nearly zero work in Javascript
(the one exception is that the layout widget hierarchy *does* have a
provision for a post-layout fixup pass, but it's expected to do nothing
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Sven Brunken s...@extjs.com wrote:
On 6 Aug., 18:07, John Tamplin j...@google.com wrote:
When you say good support, what exactly do you mean? I think it is not
practical to support image bundles with transparency in the same manner
as
all the other
Nothing should be deleted from tools/ ever. The only exceptions would be
something added by mistake that no version of GWT depends on.
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 11:58 PM, codesite-nore...@google.com wrote:
Revision: 5897
Author: rj...@google.com
Date: Wed Aug 5 20:57:41 2009
Log: Rolling
Yes I know there is a big difference about the two layout systems but
we could
use the same interfaces and base classes. This is easy to do, I think,
since both
layout systems will use a layout cascade (RootLayoutPanel and Viewport
for
gwt-mosaic) and things like that.
Later today I will try to
This case happens to be in the exception category.
These were files that I had added a couple of days ago. And only my code
depended on it. I found a way to use already existing libraries from tools
instead of these libs. Since there was no other use for them, I deleted them
after consulting with
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Joel Webber j...@google.com wrote:
If we want to support IE6 fully (which I hate having to do, but it's hard
to argue with the fact that it still account for ~20% of the market,
depending upon whose stats you use), then I think this is basically the only
George,
Please do have a look and see what might be done to make this easier. The
names are definitely the most negotiable part of the design, and I'm
definitely open to other ways of handling the RootLayoutPanel problem. The
biggest issue I have with it at present is that there's no way to get()
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:39 PM, John Tamplin j...@google.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Joel Webber j...@google.com wrote:
If we want to support IE6 fully (which I hate having to do, but it's hard
to argue with the fact that it still account for ~20% of the market,
depending upon
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Joel Webber j...@google.com wrote:
Please do have a look and see what might be done to make this easier. The
names are definitely the most negotiable part of the design, and I'm
definitely open to other ways of handling the RootLayoutPanel problem. The
biggest
LGTM, but in the future no need to review trivial things like this.
Instead, just do the commit and then leave a chinchilla at Dan's desk.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56803
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Matt Mastracci matt...@mastracci.comwrote:
+1 This works well for us and I'd love to remove the complexity from our
build process. We've dropped the transparency loader for some time now and
it's solved a lot of our IE6 bugginess (including random hard browser
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:43 PM, John Tamplin j...@google.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Joel Webber j...@google.com wrote:
Please do have a look and see what might be done to make this easier. The
names are definitely the most negotiable part of the design, and I'm
definitely
Revision: 5904
Author: jlaba...@google.com
Date: Thu Aug 6 10:54:59 2009
Log: Fixing a checkstyle error.
Patch by: jlabanca
Review by: scottb
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=5904
Modified:
/trunk/user/test/com/google/gwt/emultest/java/util/EnumSetTest.java
On Aug 6, 5:32 pm, John Tamplin j...@google.com wrote:
I haven't built all the different platforms yet because the wire protocol is
changing and they will have to all be built again anyway. This should be
done by the end of next week.
Great - thank you.
(I guessed that was probably the
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Joel Webber j...@google.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Matt Mastracci matt...@mastracci.comwrote:
+1 This works well for us and I'd love to remove the complexity from our
build process. We've dropped the transparency loader for some time now and
Yeah, I was just thinking the same thing, except that there's never a case
where it shouldn't propagate (onLayout() is purely informative, for those
widgets that occasionally need to do fixup work). I'll go stick that in now.
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
I can imagine, if I squint just right, wanting to set the size a few times
before kicking off the possibly expensive chain event of child calls.
Perhaps setSize() should default to announcing, and the overload with the
boolean is there to allow avoiding the side effect?
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at
Gotcha. Sorry, I saw that Ray had rolled-back the deletion and it scared
me. :)
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Amit Manjhi amitman...@google.com wrote:
This case happens to be in the exception category.
These were files that I had added a couple of days ago. And only my code
depended on
Hi have a look at the code in LayoutPanel (mosaic) lines (446-450):
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-mosaic/source/browse/branches/GWT-2.0/src/org/gwt/mosaic/ui/client/layout/LayoutPanel.java
I use a ResizableWidgetCollection from GWT Incubator, it works but I
don't think its a very good idea.
On
Thanks for the review.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51835/diff/3001/3006
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/linker/impl/hosted.html
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51835/diff/3001/3006#newcode23
Line 23: $legacyHosted = true;
On 2009/08/06 19:17:50, amitmanjhi wrote:
Yeah, the enhanced-for comment for assigning to array elements is dumb. My
bad.
Please feel free to submit after making changes.
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 12:46 PM, j...@google.com wrote:
Thanks for the review.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51835/diff/3001/3006
File
Revision: 5905
Author: b...@google.com
Date: Thu Aug 6 13:08:36 2009
Log: Edited wiki page through web user interface.
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=5905
Modified:
/wiki/ImageResource.wiki
===
--- /wiki/ImageResource.wiki
Reviewers: scottb,
Message:
Review requested.
Description:
This is a convenience method for the permutation reduction work.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56806
Affected files:
M dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/collect/Sets.java
Index:
I'll commit it soon. While running pre-submit tests, I noticed that the
integration test fails in hosted mode, as is expected. I'm adding a
GWT.isScript() guard around that test.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51829/diff/1/3
File
Revision: 5906
Author: sp...@google.com
Date: Thu Aug 6 13:55:18 2009
Log: Fixes the two known problems with runAsync lightweight metrics
events. Also, adds test cases that could have caught
those problems.
Review by: bobv
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=5906
Reviewers: bruce, scottb, Lex,
Message:
Review requested.
Description:
This patch allows set-property and extend-property to be subjected
to conditions based on deferred-binding property values. The net effect
allows the developer to use a richer number of deferred-binding
properties without
Just nits.
BTW: while you're in here, can you remove the 'normalize' call from
Maps(112)? It's not necessary because if the incoming map has more than
1 entry, the result map will certainly have more than 1 and already be
the right type.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56806/diff/1/2
File
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56806/diff/1/2
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/util/collect/Sets.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56806/diff/1/2#newcode76
Line 76: SetT result = new HashSetT(toAdd);
Actually, you can't do this, this is wrong. You have to initialize
Revision: 5907
Author: jlaba...@google.com
Date: Thu Aug 6 14:05:34 2009
Log: Enabling showOutput in the ant junit task so we can see our own errors
and messages during the build process.
Patch by: jlabanca
Review by: rjrjr (TBR)
LGTM
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 2:05 PM, codesite-nore...@google.com wrote:
Revision: 5907
Author: jlaba...@google.com
Date: Thu Aug 6 14:05:34 2009
Log: Enabling showOutput in the ant junit task so we can see our own errors
and messages during the build process.
Patch by: jlabanca
Review
Revision: 5908
Author: b...@google.com
Date: Thu Aug 6 14:35:18 2009
Log: Add Sets.addAll() utility method.
Update to Maps.pulAll() per Scott.
Patch by: bobv
Review by: scottb
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=5908
Modified:
Revision: 5909
Author: rj...@google.com
Date: Thu Aug 6 15:39:10 2009
Log: Cherry pick c5896 for UiBinder
svn merge -c5896 https://google-web-toolkit.googlecode.com/svn/trunk .
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=5909
Added:
Revision: 5910
Author: sp...@google.com
Date: Thu Aug 6 16:38:05 2009
Log: Rolling back r5906 due to a build failure.
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=5910
Deleted:
/trunk/user/test/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/RunAsyncMetricsIntegrationTest.gwt.xml
@Bob, are you interested in reviewing these changes or should I just go
with Amit's review?
While making changes from Amit's review, I noticed a bug which slipped
past and decided I needed to find a way to test the wire protocol code.
In the process, I found a couple more bugs in unused code
Hey Ray,
Issue #3929 points out that there may be some missing bits to UiBinder
(namely, javadoc generation). I mentioned to the developer who
reported the issue that it was a bit early to issue bug reports
against the UiBinder, and this issue was likely to be addressed before
a milestone drop
Thanks for the review. I will commit it as-is and we can make further
changes as you use this code with HTMLUnit.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51835/diff/4011/4014
File dev/oophm/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/BrowserChannel.java (right):
Committed to trunk at r5911.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51835
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Hi Joel,
I did a very-very simplified layout system based on
top,bottom,left,right,width and height CSS attributes:
http://69.20.122.77:8880/gwt-layout/
So far SimpleLayout, HBoxLayout VBoxLayout are implemented.
Source files: http://69.20.122.77:8880/gwt-layout/org.gwt20.mosaic.demo.tbz2
60 matches
Mail list logo
