Comment by dain.kaplan:
Is there an expected release date for 2.1.1? I very much want to use the
server-side AutoBean code.
For more information:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/wiki/RequestFactory_2_1_1
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Hi
My name is Luis, I'm from Spain and I'm ready to contribute to GWT.
I have checked out the trunk and configured my eclipse as said here:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/browse/trunk/eclipse/README.txt.
I have set the checkstyle and the error/warning configuration and then
Full disclosure - I am the one who has suggested a possible evolution of
Activity. I was suggested the introduction of a mechanism to allow an
existing Activity to be informed when the Place has changed but the Activity
has not (e.g. when there is a change in Place tokens). I commented about how
Reviewers: rchandia,
Description:
Fix external issues 5521, 5446, 5332, javadoc links
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1186801/show
Affected files:
M user/src/com/google/gwt/dom/client/OptionElement.java
M user/src/com/google/gwt/dom/client/Touch.java
M
Comment by larse...@gmail.com:
{{{
@Category(PersonCategory.class)
interface MyFactory {
// Would be illegal without a category providing an implementation of
doSomething()
AutoBeanPerson person();
}
}}}
Shouldn't this read
{{{
@Category(PersonCategory.class)
interface MyFactory extends
Let me push harder for the abstract class. If the class is documented to
forbid non-trivial default implementations, there would be no need to mock
it, and no chance of breaking people who decide to use the interface
directly for whatever reason.
WRT to the single base class problem, I was
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1186801/show
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Luis Solano luissolan...@gmail.com wrote:
I have checked out the trunk and configured my eclipse as said here:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/browse/trunk/eclipse/README.txt
.
I have set the checkstyle and the error/warning configuration
Some of them stem from third-party code that has come into GWT, such
as Rhino or ASM.
I've been crossing my fingers about this feature for awhile now:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=220928
(No idea if the 3rd party code is currently in separate source folders,
but it might be
Reviewers: jlabanca,
Description:
Undeprecate HandlerManager and TabPanel, neither of which is quite
ready to die yet.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1187801/show
Affected files:
M user/src/com/google/gwt/event/shared/HandlerManager.java
M
John, there have been internal discussions about both of these
un-deprecations. Joel wants TabPanel to be blessed again, and we lack
any alternative to HandlerManager for widget developers so far.
On 2010/12/03 18:47:12, rjrjr wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1187801/show
--
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5709
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1187801/show
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Revision: 9353
Author: rchan...@google.com
Date: Fri Dec 3 03:56:03 2010
Log: Fixes two issues
Issue 5460: Scaffold app expenses does not store decimal values
Issue 5663: DoubleParser rounds values to integers
Thanks to t.bro...@gmail.com
Review at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1181802
Revision: 9354
Author: con...@google.com
Date: Fri Dec 3 05:03:49 2010
Log: In CompilingClassLoader, refuse to load a class if its compilation
unit has errors.
Review at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1167801
Review by: sco...@google.com
Revision: 9355
Author: jlaba...@google.com
Date: Fri Dec 3 05:16:36 2010
Log: Adding methods to insert columns, get the column count, and get
columns by index in a CellTable. Thesemethods are very useful for changing
the visible Columns. Currently, users must remove all columns, then re-add
Revision: 9356
Author: r...@google.com
Date: Fri Dec 3 07:31:58 2010
Log: Fix external issues 5521, 5446, 5332, javadoc links
Review at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1186801
Review by: rchan...@google.com
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=9356
Modified:
making it a class instead of an interface means we can't mock it anymore.
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:55 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
We're making a few breaking changes in 2.1.1 to the new features introduced
in 2.1. (We're not supposed to do that kind of thing, but are hoping to get
Any part of my point is that making sure it remains a trivial class with
only no-ops means you don't need to mock it. Is that a reasonable
assumption?
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Patrick Julien pjul...@gmail.com wrote:
making it a class instead of an interface means we can't mock it
I don't know since I don't know what your plans are, will just have to
trust you.
That being said, the Activity interface is currently really nice and
it doesn't tie us down to a single class for inheritance.
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
Any part of my point
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Patrick Julien pjul...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know since I don't know what your plans are, will just have to
trust you.
That being said, the Activity interface is currently really nice and
it doesn't tie us down to a single class for inheritance.
I have
This is more in line with what we're doing. With what we experienced
with the ramp up to 2.1.0, we only use the Activity interface, we
don't use the default implementation and instead make our own for
common classes of use cases.
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 3:02 PM, John Tamplin j...@google.com
Patrick, you're the case in point. Because you don't use the abstract class,
if we change the API later we will break your app.
Were you unable to use the abstract class? If the Activity interface were
documented to encourage you to do so, would you have? When we break your
app, will you be okay
LGTM
Just curious why we need to @SuppressWarnings in HandlerManager
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1187801/diff/1/2
File user/src/com/google/gwt/event/shared/HandlerManager.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1187801/diff/1/2#newcode57
I don't know what features are planned or contemplated beyond what Neil
mentioned, but could the use of sub-interfaces help? For example, Neil's
feature (+1 BTW) might use a PlaceAwareActivity which extends Activity?
AbstractActivity can potentially implement them all new sub-interfaces.
The
One more question for Patrick: would you be better able to use
AbstractActivity if the IsActivity interface were available?
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
Patrick, you're the case in point. Because you don't use the abstract
class, if we change the API later
Various package private methods on SimpleEventBus exist only for legacy
support for HandlerManager, and are deprecated. I don't want new code
calling them.
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 12:22 PM, jlaba...@google.com wrote:
LGTM
Just curious why we need to @SuppressWarnings in HandlerManager
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 3:18 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
Patrick, you're the case in point. Because you don't use the abstract class,
if we change the API later we will break your app.
I guess I don't understand how you're making it better then. I'm
currently working on Android and I
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
One more question for Patrick: would you be better able to use
AbstractActivity if the IsActivity interface were available?
I don't want to speak for anybody else but not to me no. What
AbstractActivity provides is so little that
committed as r9355
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1181801/diff/1/2
File user/src/com/google/gwt/user/cellview/client/CellTable.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1181801/diff/1/2#newcode599
user/src/com/google/gwt/user/cellview/client/CellTable.java:599: public
void
On 2010/12/03 00:21:35, conroy wrote:
ping! i was hoping to push this today...
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1184801/show
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1184801/show
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Reviewers: scottb, rjrjr,
Description:
Rolling back r9354 due to some GWTTestCase breakages
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1188801/show
Affected files:
M dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/CompilingClassLoader.java
Index:
LGTM
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 3:57 PM, con...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: scottb, rjrjr,
Description:
Rolling back r9354 due to some GWTTestCase breakages
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1188801/show
Affected files:
M
Reviewers: unnurg,
Description:
Modifications to StackTraceDeobfuscator:
- Introduces a new protected method, getSymbolMapInputStream(), to
obtain a symbol map InputStream for a given permutation strong name, to
be overridden by subclasses.
- Makes the deobfuscateStackTrace() convenience method
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1189801/show
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
35 matches
Mail list logo
