Actually, I'm not sure that this is accurate. I just tried it out against
gwt-user and gwt-dev with natures and builders on in a clean eclipse Helios
install (no GPE) and I did not see any exceptions thrown. There were no
visible exceptions and the error log was not updated.
It seems worth it
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 5:34 AM, yves yves.ko...@gmail.com wrote:
@Jeff
As you suggested me, I tried the followig without success (same OOME
problem):
public class ResultNodeT extends IResultNode implements IResultNode
and
public interface IResultNode extends Result
Again this is
[+zhuyi]
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 5:34 AM, yves yves.ko...@gmail.com wrote:
@Jeff
As you suggested me, I tried the followig without success (same OOME
problem):
public class ResultNodeT extends IResultNode implements
@yves: What does the ResultNode class look like? It is class ResultNodeT
extends ResultNode? but what about its supertype and fields?
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 10:50 AM, yves yves.ko...@gmail.com wrote:
Chris,
JConsole does not succeed to connect to the java compilation : I get
an out of
to remove from the code many unsafe
type cast. Now with the generics I am sure of the member type
(next[]). Isn't this the goal of generics ? :-)
Yves
On 11 nov, 17:34, Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com wrote:
@yves: What does the ResultNode class look like? It is class
ResultNodeT
extends
[+fabbott]
Thanks for pointing this out Thomas.
@fabbott: can you take a look and see what went on here? I took a look and
can confirm that not all of
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=8890 was
mirrored over.
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:21 AM, Thomas Broyer
metadata for branch
integrations), but that... shouldn't... have affected the textual content of
any given mirror, especially one that wasn't a cross-branch copy/merge
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com wrote:
[+fabbott]
Thanks for pointing this out Thomas
Thanks for spotting that Patrick. I'll get the code updated.
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Patrick Julien pjul...@gmail.com wrote:
using this as tmp work around for now:
package com...workarounds;
import com.google.gwt.app.place.PropertyColumn;
import
Eric, I think that you are on the right track by trying to measure the
effectiveness of each optimization -- even if we need to more data to
increase the accuracy.
On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:02 AM, Eric Ayers zun...@google.com wrote:
I was thinking about how keeping track of the AST size on the
FWIW, since we the time bounds of further optimizing this patch are not yet
clear, I'd be in favor of landing it and then doing a second round of
optimizations.
On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Jason Rosenberg jbrosenb...@google.comwrote:
So, I've added some minor clarification in the comments
Keith, could you take a look at this one. If it is easy, maybe we can add
it to 1.4?
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Matt Mastracci matt...@mastracci.comwrote:
I think I worded this more clearly in the bug, but it's actually the format
save action that causes the JSNI to be unformatted, not
a huge patch for review
at the end. I can do either or something in between, but I tend to lean
towards the incremental approach.
El 18 de marzo de 2010 14:40, Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com escribió:
Not sure if this has been discussed already, but you should consider
developing
Not sure if this has been discussed already, but you should consider
developing these in a branch until the landing plan for the changes is
clear.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 9:50 AM, rchan...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: fabbott,
Description:
Array implementation for Lightweight Collections.
Thanks Lex!
2010/3/12 Lex Spoon sp...@google.com
2010/3/11 Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com
+1 to Ray's question. I know that you were simply doing a fix Lex, but we
need to think about how we test these features.
I agree. I'll work out a test. -Lex
--
http://groups.google.com/group
+1 to Ray's question. I know that you were simply doing a fix Lex, but we
need to think about how we test these features.
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:49 PM, cromwell...@gmail.com wrote:
LGTM. On a side note, is there a way to write a test case for this?
We should have the 2.0.2 release out by end of day today or Monday at the
latest.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 3:40 AM, stuckagain david.no...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Any idea when there will be a GWT 2.0.2 ? The 2.0.1 contains a few
issues that stops us from migrating (already reported and fixed),
We are in the process of smoke testing 2.0.1. We expect for it to be
released in the next day or so.
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 7:18 AM, David david.no...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
The subject of roadmap ... when will we see a 2.0.1 ? We currently
need to run with a patch gwt-servlet) due to a
The GWT 2.0.1 point release is now available for download. It contains fixes
for bugs found in the 2.0.0 release.
Potentially breaking changes and fixes
- Fixed a bug in how code generators collect method arguments from
generated source, which impacted the Messages interfaces generated for
The 2.0.0 release has been tagged. The DTD references should be correct
now. Thanks for pointing this out!
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Arthur Kalmenson arthur.k...@gmail.comwrote:
Hey everyone,
I just noticed that the DTD used in the GWT modules generated by the
GEP is incorrect. It
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 5:09 AM, David david.no...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
Small question:
Is there a reason why GWT is still using a DTD instead of a schema ?
In Schema's you can put a lot extra information (inline docs) and
eclipse also supports completions with schemas if you put the schema
Hi Folks!
We have some very exciting announcements today. Please check out the
following blog post that covers the GWT 2.0 SDK, Google Plugin for Eclipse,
and -- brand new in GWT 2.0 -- a performance analysis tool called Speed
Tracer. I think that you will find it pretty interesting...
That is right, at the time that the project is GWT-enabled it checks for the
existence of a war/WEB-INF/web.xml. If that exists it will think that it is
dealing with a war-style project and then it will use the HostedMode if it
is available or DevMode when launching the application. With that
One correction: When launching web apps, we use DevMode if the SDK supports
it and HostedMode otherwise.
2009/12/1 Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com
That is right, at the time that the project is GWT-enabled it checks for
the existence of a war/WEB-INF/web.xml. If that exists it will think
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 12:17 AM, rda...@google.com wrote:
Thanks for the review!
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/111807/diff/1/5
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/remoteui/RemoteUI.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/111807/diff/1/5#newcode169
Line 169:
Thanks for the clarification.
2009/11/24 Rajeev Dayal rda...@google.com
Ok, I did confirm it - check out the documentation on
DevModeUI.setStartupURLs - that defines the values in the map.
2009/11/24 Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 12:17 AM, rda...@google.com
Thanks. I ended up deleting the issue because Bruce committed a fix
separately. Thanks for looking at it though.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Rajeev Dayal rda...@google.com wrote:
The Rietveld link does not seem to be working, but LGTM.
On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 5:18 PM,
I can't attach a new patch to the issue since I don't own it, but here is
the updated patch that we pair programed. It fixes the problems uncovered
by the unit test. This patch should be applied over patch set 3.
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 11:06 AM, mmen...@google.com wrote:
I found a couple of
And here is the patch...
2009/10/20 Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com
I can't attach a new patch to the issue since I don't own it, but here is
the updated patch that we pair programed. It fixes the problems uncovered
by the unit test. This patch should be applied over patch set 3.
On Tue
Thanks. Committed as r6437.
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:01 AM, rda...@google.com wrote:
LGTM.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/83806
--
Miguel
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Here is some more information. I ran into this problem while testing the
plugin against GWT 1.7, trunk, and 2.0 MS1.
It looks like whenever we generate the hosted.html we use the timestamp of
that file as it was inside of the gwt-dev-PLAT.jar. It would seem to me
that we want to touch that file
I entered the issue
4112http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=4112,
to track this problem.
2009/10/7 Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com
Here is some more information. I ran into this problem while testing the
plugin against GWT 1.7, trunk, and 2.0 MS1.
It looks like
between GWT Trunk and the stable version
seamlessly?
It has nothing to do with browser caching because the actual
hosted.html file in the project has the value 2.0 instead of 1.6. I
did try clearing the browser cache though.
Any help would be very much appreciated.
On Oct 7, 10:29 am, Miguel
I've also run into this problem...
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 8:37 AM, Marko Vuksanovic markovuksano...@gmail.com
wrote:
I had the same problem.. After struggling for 2 days I figured out
that the embedded jetty loads the hosted.html file form cache (C:
\Documents and
I actually did ignore it specifically, but I took your suggestion to not do
that and simply rely on the annotation.
We can treat RpcService specially.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
Miguel, are you and John in touch on this? I thought you were going to
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Scott Blum sco...@google.com wrote:
I think the ones in user/test are fine, but may I offer a note of caution
to the one in user/src? Depending on the settings, some compilers will emit
a warning if you try to suppress a warning that they don't understand,
Hi everyone,
We wanted to let all of you know that the Google Plugin for Eclipse 1.1.0 is
now available. Some of the notable improvements are:
- Support for Eclipse 3.5 (Galileo)
- GWT RPC interface validation with quick fixes
- App Engine DataNucleus enhancer console no longer steals
2009/7/30 Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com:
Hi everyone,
We wanted to let all of you know that the Google Plugin for Eclipse 1.1.0
is
now available. Some of the notable improvements are:
Support for Eclipse 3.5 (Galileo)
GWT RPC interface validation with quick fixes
App Engine
possible paths of execution for
reaching B_j must first go through B_i, guaranteeing the clinitA() would
have been invoked.
-Ray
2009/6/17 Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com
If you are going to tackle the intra-block optimization, you might as well
for inter-block opt with block summaries
at the moment.
-Ray
2009/6/17 Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com
Longer term moving towards an SSA variant has a lot of
advantages. In the near term, simply experimenting with performing the
classic intra-procedural (block global) optimizations wouldn't necessarily
require SSA although SSA
We are looking at ways to better integrate with Webtools. My comment #2 on
the following issue
3583http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=3583calls
out some of the changes under consideration. Issue
3584 http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=3584also
Also, please weigh in on those issues or create a new issue if they don't
cover your use cases for Webtools integration.
2009/5/8 Miguel Méndez mmen...@google.com
We are looking at ways to better integrate with Webtools. My comment #2 on
the following issue
3583http://code.google.com/p
We've talked about exposing zip files for use with 3.4's dropins folder,
etc. Would that work meet your constraints?
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 3:44 AM, stuckagain david.no...@gmail.com wrote:
Great news,
Any chance for getting an offline installation for the eclipse
plugin ? Company policy
Can we get a patch?
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 5:55 PM, Scott Blum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hearing no objections, we implemented this. :)
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:00 AM, BobV [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Scott, Miguel, Kelly, and I sat down today to try to resolve some of
the problems with
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 8:42 AM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Miguel,
Could you please review this patch? It is very small!
I am currently running into issues with maps regression tests failing due
to some problems with the Maps JavaScript API. The Maps JavaScript API can
be
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 9:44 AM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Miguel Méndez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 8:42 AM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Miguel,
Could you please review this patch? It is very small!
I am
LGTM
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 11:35 AM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Miguel,
Would you mind reviewing the attached patch? It only changes comments
and formatting.
The API suffered through a long bout of build breakage. While
debugging it, I ran across some comments that were
?
I just created a new diff on my Linux box and it looks slightly
different (attached). Would you mind giving that one a try (r875)
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Miguel Méndez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The patch did not apply cleanly against r874. Was that the revision
against
which
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Miguel
Attached is a demo for the WorkerPool class that I would like for you to
review.
The demo is a bit more rich than the demos for the other Gears features. I
intend to add documentation for a simple worker pool
LGTM
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Miguel,
This patch addresses issue 183, a typo in a method name:
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-google-apis/issues/detail?id=183
I renamed the method in the library class and updated the test.
M
] wrote:
Attached file that belongs in
samples/Showcase/src/com/google/gwt/sample/showcase/client/gwtLogoThumb.png
On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 10:02 AM, Miguel Méndez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Miguel
Attached is a demo
LGTM just a couple of nits below.
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A
samples/gadgetrpc/src/com/google/gwt/gadgets/sample/gadgetrpc/server/GadgetRPCServlet.java
Nit: Add @SuppressWarning(serial). Did you intend to have the
servletStartTime field be static?
It all sounds good to me.
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Committed as r853 and r854. Thanks for the review.
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Miguel Méndez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LGTM just a couple of nits below.
On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 1:52 PM
Should InfoWindow be included in this patch?
Shouldn't the Overlay.createPeer method perform the tests on the
JavaScriptObject and return the correct concrete wrapper class?
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Miguel,
I would like you to review the
pattern and added a demo. If you
want to see it work, run it on a Windows platform, that's the only platform
supported by the Google Earth plugin.
-Eric.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Miguel Méndez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that I drew the *Handler analogy with the assumption
LGTM!
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Updated patch attached.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Miguel Méndez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A
maps/maps/src/com/google/gwt/maps/client/event/EarthInstanceHandler.java
LG
M maps/maps/src/com/google/gwt
Sweet!!!
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks. committed as r803. That was the last issue marked for RC1!
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Miguel Méndez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LGTM!
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED
LGTM
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 7:40 AM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I updated issue 171 - the 1.5.2 release is broken on this unit test, but
has been subsequently fixed. See GWT issue 2841
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=2841
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 4:30
LGTM
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:12 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Miguel,
This change addresses issue 46 (add the closeInfoWindow() method to the
MapWidget class), and also addresses a long standing issue, which is to make
a 1:1 relationship between the InfoWindow object and
LGTM - Don't forget to set the mime type and line ending properties for the
new files.
What is the resolution for the DirectionResults TODOs? Is this future work?
On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Miguel,
I would like for you to review the attached
. It won't appear to matter until people start using windows
and unix systems to work on the source code. Committed the fix in r786.
Committed as r785.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Miguel Méndez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
LGTM - Don't forget to set the mime type and line ending
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 3:54 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Miguel,
I've combined the conversion of several classes into one patch because of
the overlap.
- PolylineOptions
- PolygonOptions
- Fixed constructor name in PolyStyleOptions.java
- Fixed references to above.
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Miguel Méndez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
M maps/maps/src/com/google/gwt/maps/client/geom/Bounds.java
37 - This Bounds
LGTM
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 12:52 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Miguel Méndez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 3:54 PM, Eric Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Miguel,
I've combined the conversion of several classes into one
63 matches
Mail list logo
