The code LG, one high-level comment about the design. Assuming we're ok
with the design implications, this seems good.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/21801/diff/1/2
File
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/linker/impl/SelectionScriptLinker.java
(right):
LGTM.
BTW: if you want to go the extra mile, you can get even more speed up by
reusing the StringBuilder. Call setLength(0) to start fresh, but it
retains the internal char buffer so you can avoid tons of allocations.
You could probably either pass a reusable buffer through as a param, or
keep
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34817
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit Contributors group.
To post to this group, send email to
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/33831/diff/1/2
File user/super/com/google/gwt/emul/java/util/Date.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/33831/diff/1/2#newcode169
Line 169: @java.util.Date::checkJsDate()();
Should be th...@java.util.date:: and so on throughout.
Mostly nits.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34822/diff/1/2
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JClassLiteral.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34822/diff/1/2#newcode68
Line 68: if (type instanceof JClassType !(type instanceof
JArrayType)) {
JArrayType no longer
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34822/diff/33/1003
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JClassLiteral.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34822/diff/33/1003#newcode60
Line 60: // There's only one seed function for all arrays
*shrug* BTW: this type should be an
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/33837/diff/1/2
File common.ant.xml (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/33837/diff/1/2#newcode6
Line 6: property file=local.ant.properties /
+10!
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/33837/diff/1/2#newcode145
Line 145: jar destfile=${project.lib}
Mostly LGTM, some comments.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/33804/diff/24/30
File
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/linker/impl/SelectionScriptLinker.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/33804/diff/24/30#newcode388
Line 388: * @param modifyPrimaryJavascript(strongName)
LGTM, but how about committing that one completely unrelated change
separately.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/33841
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34830
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Love what this patch does!
I kind of want to separate simplifyEq and simplifyNeq into separate code
paths. I think it would be a little clearer, and would pave the way for
more equality/inequality optimizations (for example, two different value
literals).
LGTM, will commit.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34831
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34834
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
LGTM. Want to point out that we can optimize some of these even better
in cases where the nested code is an expression statement.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/33845/diff/1/2
File dev/core/test/com/google/gwt/dev/js/JsStaticEvalTest.java (right):
LGTM, but could we handle if (false) also? It can only make our
optimizations better.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34835/diff/1/3
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JIfStatement.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34835/diff/1/3#newcode64
Line 64: if (thenStmt
LGTM, we've been needing this for a while. :)
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/36802
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
LGTM. Committed at r5540 with minor tweaks.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/36801
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
LGTM.
By the way, instant hosted mode should reduce CompilationState.compile
drastically, so help is on the way!
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/38801
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Reviewers: bobv, jat,
Description:
This patch adds a new method to GeneratorContext that makes a new
ResourceOracle available specifically to generators. This
ResourceOracle contains all of the resources on the classpath that are
associated with source files on the sourcepath. Certain
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/40801/diff/1/2
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/GeneratorContext.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/40801/diff/1/2#newcode76
Line 76: * being compiled.
Will clarify doc.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/40801
Bob, I have some questions about the twilight zone in which this new
class loader lives, but I'm kinda swamped this week. Maybe we can make
some time to discuss?
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34836
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/39805
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Glanced over it, but I'm sure it's fine so I didn't fine-tooth it.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/34836
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/42801/diff/1/2
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/js/JsInliner.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/42801/diff/1/2#newcode853
Line 853: JsFunction currentFunction = functionStack.peek();
callerFunction would be slightly more clear?
Reviewers: jgw,
Description:
A few miscellaneous fixes for JS issues. We might also want to merge
into releases/1.6.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/42802
Affected files:
user/src/com/google/gwt/dom/client/OptionElement.java
LGTM with comments.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/47804/diff/1/3
File user/src/com/google/gwt/junit/client/GWTTestCase.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/47804/diff/1/3#newcode52
Line 52: * {...@link UnsupportedOperationException}.Instead, override
{...@link #gwtSetUp()}
Reviewers: ,
Description:
Makes it go much faster
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/48803
Affected files:
user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/AbstractLocalizableImplCreator.java
user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/ResourceFactory.java
I didn't look at anything but the bounded queue, which piqued my
interest. :)
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/47806/diff/1/11
File user/src/com/google/gwt/core/client/impl/AsyncFragmentLoader.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/47806/diff/1/11#newcode105
Line 105: * A
LGTM, with comment.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/46802/diff/1/3
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/ReplaceRebinds.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/46802/diff/1/3#newcode95
Line 95: // Proper JSNI ref
Shouldn't most of this lookup logic be duplicated elsewhere
1 issue, but no need to re-review
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/50805/diff/1/3
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/SelectionProperty.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/50805/diff/1/3#newcode44
Line 44: * Gets the fallback value for the property
Period should go here.
LGTM with comments
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/46801/diff/1041/26
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jdt/AbstractCompiler.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/46801/diff/1041/26#newcode504
Line 504: protected String[]
doFindAdditionalTypesUsingArtificialRescues(
Yeah,
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/48808
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
You should add a new test suite to com.google.gwt.junit. To your new
test suite please also add all of the test classes in
com.google.gwt.junit.client and com.google.gwt.junit.remote which are
currently NOT getting run!
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/48809/diff/1/2
File
Another (cleaner?) solution would be to make activeLinkers a
ListString and activePrimaryLinker String, as a pure reflection of
add-linker statements. Meanwhile linkerTypesByName remains as pure
reflection of define-linker statements.
Then just generate the appropriate answers via the map on
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/47813
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
LGTM, only comment is that for tiny test types that small, it would
probably be better to just make them static inners of the test class.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51805
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Reviewers: bobv,
Description:
Fixes internal type hierarchy for overlay types.
All interfaces implemented by any overlay types are now directly
implemented by JSO itself. This resolves a subtle bug where things
could get tightened to subclasses of JSO, which is never correct.
Please review
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/54802/diff/1/2
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/ast/JTypeOracle.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/54802/diff/1/2#newcode214
Line 214: private final MapJClassType, SetJInterfaceType
implementsMap = new IdentityHashMapJClassType,
Reviewers: ,
Description:
Lex: can you double-check this please?
Make declaration statements for the variables created in the catch block
normalizer, instead of just assignment statements.
Also fixes a problem where the same JLocalRef would appear in the tree
multiple times.
Patch by:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51813/diff/1/2
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/CatchBlockNormalizer.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51813/diff/1/2#newcode66
Line 66: JLocal exObj = popTempLocal();
Actually, before I commit I should rename this to 'exVar' or
More detail to clarify. Given the following source code:
try {
Window.alert(Hello, AJAX);
} catch (IndexOutOfBoundsException a) {
Window.alert(a.toString());
} catch (RuntimeException b) {
Window.alert(b.toString());
} catch (Throwable c) {
Window.alert(c.toString());
}
We were
Mostly LGTM.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51816/diff/1/2
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/js/JsParser.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51816/diff/1/2#newcode159
Line 159: SourceInfo toReturn = program.createSourceInfo(lineno,
parent.getFileName());
Why can't we use
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51816/diff/1/2
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/js/JsParser.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51816/diff/1/2#newcode159
Line 159: SourceInfo toReturn = program.createSourceInfo(lineno,
parent.getFileName());
BTW: I didn't necessarily mean
Deleting code is awesome! LGTM, to the extent that I understand what's
going on. I'll trust you that the normal visitation patterns result in
a working end product.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51822
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
I'll trust that RunStyleHtmlUnit itself works as advertised.
I admit I'm a little dismayed at just how many tests have to be
disabled-- especially since they imply problems with user-written test
cases of their own code. StringTest is particularly distressing for me,
but I'm sure many of the
Awesome, thanks.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51826/diff/1/65
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/JSORestrictionsChecker.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51826/diff/1/65#newcode203
Line 203: private void fail() {
I just meant this visitor itself could throw the
LGTM, just make sure tests pass and stuff. :)
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/51828
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
LGTM with nit.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/55802/diff/1/2
File user/super/com/google/gwt/emul/java/util/Collections.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/55802/diff/1/2#newcode18
Line 18: import java.util.Collection;
Why was it necessary to add this import statement? You
LGTM with nit.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/55802/diff/1/2
File user/super/com/google/gwt/emul/java/util/Collections.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/55802/diff/1/2#newcode18
Line 18: import java.util.Collection;
Why was it necessary to add this import statement? You
LGTM with nits.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/55803/diff/1/3
File user/test/com/google/gwt/emultest/java/util/EnumSetTest.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/55803/diff/1/3#newcode54
Line 54: if (array[0] != Numbers.One array[1] != Numbers.One) {
What about set.contains()
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
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
LGTM, but we should probably get a thumbs-up from at least one other
interested person.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56807
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Reviewers: cromwellian_google.com, Lex, bruce,
Description:
Creates some test infrastructure to easily test individual compiler
passes.
Also started some very basic tests for ControlFlowAnalyzer,
ExpressionAnalyzer, and DeadCodeElimination.
Hopefully this will start the process of fixing
Reviewers: bobv,
Description:
One-line patch to remove javax.servlet source files from gwt-user.jar.
gwt-dev-*.jar is unaffected.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56813
Affected files:
user/build.xml
Index: user/build.xml
--- user/build.xml (revision 5922)
Hi Lex,
I reviewed everything except CodeSplitter. I looked at it briefly, but
that class is fairly unfamiliar to me. Maybe Kathrin or Bob is a better
choice?
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56814/diff/1/10
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/ReplaceRunAsyncs.java
(right):
Adding potential second eyeball reviewers.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56807
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
CodeSplitter LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56814/diff/1/9
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/CodeSplitter.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56814/diff/1/9#newcode455
Line 455: if (splitPoints.size() != 1) {
Can splitPoints.size() == 0? If not, testing
Reviewers: Lex,
Description:
It appears JDT has a bug where it will pass you a null scope while
visiting the expression of an empty switch statement. See:
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=3936
It turns out, however, that TypeRefVisitor was only using the scope
chain
Thanks! Reported bug to JDT.
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=286682
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/58801
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Thanks, Kathrin. I just had a couple of nits myself.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/60802/diff/1/2
File
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/soyc/impl/DependencyRecorder.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/60802/diff/1/2#newcode110
Line 110: logger =
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/59802
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Great idea! LGTM.
Only comment is on the naming: maybe use CONCAT/ASG_CONCAT instead of
STR_ADD? If we did that, renaming ADD-NUM_ADD would actually be
options, since ADD would always mean arithmetic.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/61810
The one thing I don't understand is how you handle locals and params?
If you clone an expression or statements from one method into another,
how do you handle the fact that local refs and params target the wrong
method?
Otherwise LGTM.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/66802
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/67801
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/68803/diff/1/3
File user/src/com/google/gwt/user/tools/WebAppCreator.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/68803/diff/1/3#newcode264
Line 264: + condition property=\HostedMode32BitVmarg\
value=\-d32\ else=\-Dgwt.dummy.arg=\\n
I assume empty
LGTM, one nit. I also saw some spurious formatting diff cheese.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/71802/diff/1/3
File
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/JavaScriptObjectNormalizer.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/71802/diff/1/3#newcode197
Line 197: if
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/77810/diff/1007/30
File user/src/com/google/gwt/core/client/impl/Impl.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/77810/diff/1007/30#newcode166
Line 166: // What is the correct return value here or should we
re-throw?
Shouldn't this be a void method
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/77810/diff/34/1016
File user/src/com/google/gwt/core/client/impl/Impl.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/77810/diff/34/1016#newcode54
Line 54: public static native JavaScriptObject entry(JavaScriptObject
jsFunction) /*-{
I think this should be
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/77810/diff/34/1016
File user/src/com/google/gwt/core/client/impl/Impl.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/77810/diff/34/1016#newcode148
Line 148: _ = jsFunction.apply(thisObj, arguments);
Nasty. Yeah, cromwellian, or maybe spoon.
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/77810/diff/41/1023
File user/src/com/google/gwt/core/client/impl/Impl.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/77810/diff/41/1023#newcode163
Line 163: boolean outermost;
Nitpick: this is somewhat confusing. What about a static int
entryDepth?
Bob, this patch looks good. But I have to admit I can't understand why
it's currently broken.
Explain to me again why this transformation breaks?
(a, b).foo() -- foo((a,b))
I didn't completely follow the pattern you showed.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/78818/diff/1/2
File
Also: test case por favor?
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/78818
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
I was thinking we didn't necessarily need 4 people to review all the
same (mostly trivial) changes, so I synced up with Dan at his desk on
the few remaining items he had questions about. Do we really need more
review at this point? If it LGTY, it LGTM.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/86801
Looks Reviewed To Me ;)
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/86809/diff/1/3
File user/build.xml (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/86809/diff/1/3#newcode454
Line 454: /sequential
@jlabanca: we can actually turn this off now
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/86809
Reviewers: jat, mmendez,
Description:
Per request from Miguel, some code cleanups.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/88805
Affected files:
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/CompileTaskRunner.java
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/ModulePanel.java
Mostly questions, and generally speaking you should select the
containing comment blocks and autoformat them into shape (don't
necessarily do the whole file as it generates diff cheese).
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/89801/diff/1/2
File
Reviewers: Lex, cromwellian_google.com, mike.aizatsky,
Description:
(All the more proof we need better, more intuitive optimization
mechanisms than static impls.)
Fixes a very obscure bug in ControlFlowAnalyzer.
In TypeTightener, we create synthetic references between an instance
method and
Passes blaze test.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/89804
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
LGTM. We used to have code that looked a lot like this, it must have
gotten killed in the merge.
BTW: have you run this on Windows? I'm not sure if chmod works there,
but we need to verify that at least it doesn't fail.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/89805
Reviewers: amitmanjhi,
Description:
This is to support new development where CCs don't retain their
TypeOracle references.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/89817
Affected files:
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/CompilationUnit.java
LGTM, some comments.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/91809/diff/1/2
File user/super/com/google/gwt/emul/java/util/ArrayList.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/91809/diff/1/2#newcode79
Line 79: clearImpl();
While you're there, it seems like we should delete this block and
BTW: the main thing I wanted to ask was if this will impact your CCL
code in any way. John T was nervous about me removing the call to
isClassnameGenerated() when making the anonymous class determination.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/89817/diff/1/3
File
LGTM, nits.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/93810/diff/1/2
File dev/core/test/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/impl/JavaResourceBase.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/93810/diff/1/2#newcode74
Line 74: code.append(public abstract class EnumE extends EnumE
implements Serializable
Also, feel free to commit this for me after review.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/100805
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Reviewers: bobv,
Description:
Bob, this should improve our error coverage quite a bit.
Please commit (+tweak) if good.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/102808
Affected files:
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/JsniChecker.java
Reviewers: rice+legacy,
Description:
Hi Dan, small review: this is what I was getting at about merging the
module pinning and no refresh on first load together.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/106805
Affected files:
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/DevMode.java
LVGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/107801
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Gracias.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/106805
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Reviewers: jat,
Description:
This function is to be called from the GWT dev plugin.
Also removes legacy support from hosted.html.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/109802
Affected files:
dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/linker/impl/hosted.html
--
Reviewers: jat,
Message:
Some notes:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/112801/diff/1007/15
File plugins/npapi/LocalObjectTable.h (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/112801/diff/1007/15#newcode74
Line 74: setFree(id);
This was causing a debug check to fail. If you do the setFree(id)
On 2009/11/22 16:49:17, jat wrote:
However, I think perhaps disconnect callbacks should be moved to the
common code
and added to SessionHandler. That would still leave noticing
disconnects on
sends, but it might be worth the effort. What do you think?
Sure, I can give this a shot. Common
LVGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/112803
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Reviewers: jat, jlabanca, amitmanjhi,
Description:
Hi John,
Please review, commit, merge if you can. This fixes a problem where
clients are seen to have unstable IP addresses when coming through a
proxy. Also fixes a problem where two browsers with the same user agent
string look like the same
Reviewers: jlabanca, jat,
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/112809/diff/1/2
File user/src/com/google/gwt/junit/JUnitMessageQueue.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/112809/diff/1/2#newcode54
Line 54: public String desc;
Actually it can't be, the client's ip can change over time,
LGTM, 1 question.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/116801/diff/1/2
File plugins/ie/installer/build.xml (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/116801/diff/1/2#newcode26
Line 26: message=You must specify installer.version parameter in the
form major.minor.build.revision (ex.
Reviewers: rice+legacy,
Description:
Sometimes external collections can change unexpectedly; this change
makes us call foreign collections fewer times to protect us from the
possibility of inconsistency.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/118810
Affected files:
Good call. Hmm, my mistakes should have made us fail a unit test, but
they didn't. Guess I need to add better unit tests of this.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/118810
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Updated patch, please double check me.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/118810
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
1 - 100 of 654 matches
Mail list logo
