(through a different department, don''t ask ... )
David
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Amit Manjhi wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> We are excited to release the first milestone build for GWT 2.0 today.
> This milestone provides early access (read: known to still be
>
k would be very usefull (the incubator seems
to be dead ?) since it is the main reason why people select ExtGWT or
other GWT widget sets (which do not really use GWT the way they
should).
The only thing that is really missing in GWT is a decent RPC that can
be trusted to just work.
David
On M
Joel,
Do I read this correctly that stacktraces in exceptions will just be
available (also on IE if the emulated mode is enabled at compile time)
? That would make my current implementation of finding the source of a
Trace statement just work without changes. Great stuff.
David
On Fri, Nov 6
he handler automatically for example).
David
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 6:52 AM, Jamie Gennis wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've been writing a GWT library to implement the command pattern for GWT RPC
> calls using the same interfaces that traditional GWT RPC uses. Basically,
> when an app calls a me
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
in the XML repository.
David
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 11:59 PM, Fu
I did not file a bug report yet. Do I need to do this or is it already done ?
On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 12:20 AM, John Tamplin wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Lex Spoon wrote:
>>
>> I don't know what the real problem is, but I'm sure that custom
>> serializers are not broken in general. T
The bigest problem with the DirectX filter was that it caused a
massive memory leak.
David
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 3:35 PM, wrote:
> I didn't say it was resolved. The memory-usage issues don't come up
> simply as a function of the number of images -- it's a function of
of GWT. Compiling from the sources means that we
need direct access to the internet, but not all companies allow that.
As long as we have some indication of what is mostly stable and what
not, we can choose at what point we whish to start using a development
build.
David
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at
it is supposed to be so great.
David
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 12:46 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Sami Jaber wrote:
>>
>> I'm agree with Thomas. RegExp integration should have been discussed in
>> the list. It is landing into the trunk from nowh
ClearCase dynamic view) so it might just be that
someone did some nasty checkin while I was testing.
I'll double check tomorrow.
David
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Joel Webber wrote:
> It shouldn't be -- if you kick off History's static initializer, it will
> GWT.create(History
And what in the case that the application is not running on the internet ?
In banking software chances are very slim that the PC is connected.
David
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 1:58 AM, Ray Cromwell wrote:
>
> John, A google hosted service would be great, sounds like a good,
> valuabl
against an interface it's always easier to just
create a proxy with a generator that implements your AOP features you want
and then proceed with calling the real implementation class.
David
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:43 AM, nicolas de loof
wrote:
>
>> > I wonder if there is any
Hello,
I just disabled the Alpha-trick for IE7 and newer and now my app is no
longer leaking - and is consuming a lot less!
I used this in my gwt.xml file (the ie7 detection is very amateuristic and
looks like a copy-paste, but I could not use conditional comments).
David
On
intersected with other widgets underneath.
David
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Joel Webber wrote:
> Thanks, David. I'll look at this as part of the process of supporting IE8
> and cleaning up IE7 ImageBundle support.
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 4:19 AM, stuckagain wrot
in the browser.
David
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Joel Webber wrote:
> Definitely on my list of things to fix as part of the IE8 cleanup. See issue
> 3589.
> Also, is there a specific issue for the HTTPS popup issue? I can't seem to
> find it if there is, but it would be
strings in there.
If that were the case then all these tricks to get dialogs to render
correctly while dragging or to cancel events are no longer needed in
IE6.
David
On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
>
>
>
> On 5 mai, 10:15, stuckagain wrote:
>> Hi,
>
Hi Joel,
Thanks for the speedy fix. I was actually planning to file a bug if
people agreed here... but this is really fast!
I did not yet sign a CLA, and I will do so ASAP.
David
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Joel Webber wrote:
> David,
> Good find. Looks like a straight-up mistak
rd to implement ? We did not yet
bother to investigate since we have to focus on getting functionality
complete first.
David
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:00 AM, jay wrote:
>
> As I see that this has begun (yeah), I'd like to throw out a few
> requests:
>
> * Please, please, plea
TBODY element when a page has been
generated.
This makes it possible to see the rendering progress instead of just
jumping on the screen after many seconds.
David
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 4:12 PM, John LaBanca wrote:
> We'll definitely keep these things in mind when moving stuff over to GWT
without the need to patch GWT. Ideally I guess the IE6
impl classes should fall back to the default implementation when the
browser is IE7. That should not be hard to implement... if only I had
access to the svn sourcetree at work (corporate policy!).
David
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Joel
PC
system.
I prefer to code against a clean API so removing old stuff is good, as
long as you guys do not decide to use yet another event mechanism in a
few months - try to keep a stable API because constant rework of
existing software is not something managers like.
David
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at
Joel,
I'll give your email to my project manager if you ever touch it again ;-)
David
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Joel Webber wrote:
> Sorry about that, David. I can promise with reasonable impunity that we
> never, ever want to go through the process of changing the event sys
have POJO code that you call from the GWT server side
layer.
david
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 7:17 AM, John Patterson wrote:
> On 4 Aug 2009, at 09:26, Rob Heittman wrote:
>
> I do just have to say ... I don't use RPC at my shop. It is a
> bit forced, as the underlying RESTful plumb
build our dialogs faster! This happens when
the application is running on HTTPS.
David
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 4:26 PM, John Tamplin wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Joel Webber wrote:
>>
>> I fully support the idea of fixing this issue one way or another, and I'm
in development mode.
>
> Did I miss something obvious?
Sounds like an interesting proposition, but is it really needed: I
tend to limit the number of permutations in development. I'm not
running multiple browsers at the same time.
David
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
memory) ?
David
> Note that we'll be doing some cool stuff with our library in the
> future that we can't easily do with GWT RPC, like generating raw
> Javascript bindings for third-party developers to interface with our
> API and using it for module-to-module cross-domain
Hi,
A nice start would be to make sure that you do not use any deprecated
methods (since the 1.7 release) since these are planned to be removed.
For the rest nothing major should break. I managed to compile my project as is.
David
On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Chris wrote:
>
> I reali
I was depending on JsInterop Global.document to get access to UI components
generated by my template engine.
The Global object is now scoped window, so I guess it is accessing the
wrong document as well ?
On Wed, 7 Sep 2016 at 11:40, David wrote:
> I'm sure that it worked before.
I'm sure that it worked before. I'm also seeing some other issues where I
am using JsInterop to interact with some generated HTML - but I am still
investigating if that is due to changes in GWT or in our codebase.
I did not work on this project for about 8 weeks, so I have quite a backlog
to go th
lt.
>
> On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 2:50 AM, David wrote:
>
>> I was depending on JsInterop Global.document to get access to UI
>> components generated by my template engine.
>> The Global object is now scoped window, so I guess it is accessing the
>> wrong docu
I'm sure my stuff was working fine with JsInterop 1.0 but with JsInterop
2.0 the only solution seems to be to use Global.top.window.document
As far as I remember I had it working somewhere half of July - but I might
be wrong. Can I force in maven to take a very specific snapshot version of
GWT 2.8.
I'm using maven and I only have a dependency on 2.8.0-SNAPSHOT.
I have forced an update of the snapshots in an eclipse refresh and now it
seems to work.
I guess it was a local maven/nexus issue ?
I hope -strict becomes the default, why would you want to ignore errors ?
In most cases it is hiding s
Speaking of j2cl and GWT 3.0 it would be nice if somehow the development
did not happen behind closed doors.
It would give us a better indication of where it is heading. I feel a bit
anxious about the future because of this.
I do think GWT 2.8 is a great step forward and cutting all the old stuff
I had the same issue that the EventListeners were not triggered.
It was solved by adding -generateJsInteropExports to the SDM startup and to
the gwtc arguments.
Make sure that you delete the folder in temp that is generated by SDM. In
my case, for unknown reason to me, adding the flag did not clea
I migrated my code immediatly (including the beta release of Elemental2)
Seems to work fine so far.
On Wed, 26 Apr 2017 at 14:18, Matic Petek wrote:
> Thank you very much for this.
>
>
> On Tuesday, April 25, 2017 at 9:30:20 PM UTC+2, Colin Alworth wrote:
>>
>> I'm very pleased to announce the
I guess he is going through the same steps like most devs who relied on
GWT. I recognise the same reactions I initially had. We also have huge
applications build on GWT and we don't like rewriting hings that work. But
sometimes it is a good moment to reflect on the choices that were made.
With Jav
Thanks guys!
One question:
- Migrate guava JRE emulation to GWT
Does this mean I have to migrate to a newer version of guava ?
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:31 PM Colin Alworth wrote:
> Today we released the next version of GWT, version 2.8.2. A few quick
> highlights from this new release:
>
final keyword since it allow my IDE and Java
compiler to warn me when I forget to initialize it. So I am a bit suprised
that I did not see any warnings yet.
David
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 7:36 AM, Stephen Haberman
wrote:
>
> > Does having the flag really make it that much more complicate
d
serialiser and the BigInteger cooperate gives a big performance
improvement. They only operation needed on the client-side is equals, which
can also be optimized to do a String comparison when bother have not been
parsed after RPC.
David
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 2:30 AM, John A. Tamplin wrote:
> H
: consider changing to 24-bit integers for better
performance
* in browsers.
*/
transient int digits[];
Always nice to have TODO's in code that are not done :-) Who is "jat" ?
David
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 9:14 AM, David wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The lazy parsing would onl
teger (or BigDecimal) when
really needed.
David
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 7:52 PM, John A. Tamplin wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 3:14 AM, David wrote:
>
>> The lazy parsing would only happen during deserialisation in the client.
>> I think it is safe to assume that a Big
right
data-type to use and it is not nice to have to redesign an application
because the RPC system of GWT has limitations.
David
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 10:20 PM, Brian Slesinsky wrote:
> I agree; this seems like a workaround for one application that picked the
> wrong datatype. Maybe we
No feedback from the GWT developers ?
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:09 PM, stuckagain wrote:
> What is the state for supporting Emma with GWTTestCase ?
>
> I see that the documentation still refers to a very old version of Emma
> (and EclEmma).
> How can we use JaCoCo to do automated testing with co
ither a generated
class or a mocked class.
David
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 8:08 PM, Goktug Gokdogan wrote:
> Emma (which is already broken for some cases) is going to go away with dev
> mode. We have been talking about js based alternative but I'm not sure when
> that will be ready
testing of those.
And using GWTTestCases is really painful especially since we can't even
proof that we are doing decent code coverage in our tests.
David
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:19 PM, Nicolas Wetzel wrote:
> HI !
>
> did you try gwt-test-utils ?
> it's a very good tool f
much
that I don't see coverage reports for those tests (combined with all the
rest of my coverage data).
David
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:54 PM, John A. Tamplin wrote:
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 1:12 PM, David wrote:
>
>> No I did not try that one. I tried GWT Mockito which loo
Hi Jonathan,
Thanks for the pointer, I will certainly look into this.
David
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Jonathan Fuerth wrote:
> Hey David,
>
> Christian Sadilek and I found a working solution to the GWTTestCase vs
> JaCoCo problem. Of course, it doesn't make GWTTe
One question: how do I use this on projects that do not use maven ?
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Jonathan Fuerth wrote:
> Hey David,
>
> Christian Sadilek and I found a working solution to the GWTTestCase vs
> JaCoCo problem. Of course, it doesn't make GWTTestCase a
It was in the main navigation panel. But as of this morning (GMT+1) it
works fine. So I guess it had something to do with caching ?
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
> Hmm, which link? (on which page)
>
> (there used to be such a bug, but it was fixed a few weeks ago; mayb
No problem, we are on Java 7 for quite some time. I would not even object
to Java 8 for the client side only, but I guess that can wait for 3.0.
GWT/GUI development is really screaming for lambda's with all the event
handling and async callbacks.
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Mohammed wrote:
Sounds like a hasle to require a VM... unless that VM would include
everything to get started.
Just setting up eclipse to be inline with the coding guidelines in GWT and
setting up all the libraries etc are really painful and you need to follow
the steps very carefully (and hopefully no dependency
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
>
> and you need to follow the steps very carefully (and hopefully no
>> dependency has been changed since the document was written).
>>
>
> I'm curious, which dependencies are you talking about?
>
In my case it was the checkstyle plugin for
Hi Rob,
I'm using Jboss Fuse which uses Felix and it works fine in SuperDevMode.
But did I read it right that you start the osgi container embedded with
superdevmode ? I would love to know how I can achieve that as well because
then I don't need to use the -noserver parameter anymore.
I am using
In my case it is a boolean, but not final, the value does change. Is there
an optimisation that removes the field when it is false ?
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 6:41 PM, 'Roberto Lublinerman' via GWT Contributors <
google-web-toolkit-contributors@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> Yes,I meant (instance) final
I'm excited that you guys are planning a radical change (really). I hope it
becomes more clear on what we should be using to future proof our apps.
I hope we will get some usable preview of Singular (if that is really going
to be a replacement).
Somehow I am not totally concerned that we will need
be a replacement for UiBinder or is it too early to
ask that question ?
Greets,
David
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 11:05 AM James Horsley
wrote:
> Thanks Daniel.
>
> It's great that the steering committee are discussing the topic this early
> in the process; in particular, in the c
Thanks for all the feedback. But it does not put my mind at rest right now.
It would have been much better if GWT 2.8 would have provided at least the
basis for the future of GUI development - because that was one of its main
selling points for me.
I understand why element/widget/uibinder are goi
Good points and in most cases we are covered:
- Using a Command Processor over GWT-RPC, but I will move it to a REST
implementation.
- GUI is split up in MVP and the important code is not depending on any GWT
widgets or anything else.
We are using UiBinder in our current application, but switching
with Elemental2 in the following couple of
> weeks, I think Julien is working on it and if I remember well he
> said somewhere that he will have something in the following month or two.
> Anyway, I hope your fears will not come true.
>
> Cheers.
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:58
Thanks for the info.
And don't worry, Leuven is still a peaceful and quite city which is worth a
visit thanks to its vibrant nightlife, shops and lots of students. Brussels
is a bit less hospital at the moment since the underground is closed and
there are a lot of armed forces keeping an eye out f
I don't seem to have access to 19.0 snapshot, but 19.0 is out. However it
does not work with gwt 2.8 beta1. So I am stuck on this since I will need
to wait for 20.0 which will be released after gwt 2.8 is released.
On Wed, 9 Dec 2015 at 17:43 Thomas Broyer wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, December 9,
This is the maven config from the root maven project:
net.ltgt.gwt.maven
gwt-maven-plugin
false
${project.build.directory}/gwt/launcherDir
-Xms512m
It was working fine with GWT 2.8.0-beta1 using the exact same pom files.
When I point to GWT-2.8.0-SNAPSHOT I get this error.
So the only thing that changed is the version of GWT moving from beta1 to
SNAPSHOT.
I am using logLevel ALL but it looks like the 2.8 compiler does not really
use logging.
Apr 2016 at 14:41, David wrote:
> It was working fine with GWT 2.8.0-beta1 using the exact same pom files.
> When I point to GWT-2.8.0-SNAPSHOT I get this error.
> So the only thing that changed is the version of GWT moving from beta1 to
> SNAPSHOT.
>
> I am using logLevel ALL
; bug despite its behavior: where it is reusing gwt-unitCache or the like
> from an older version of gwt.
>
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:23 AM David wrote:
>
>> I managed to get this to run in a Debugger, from within the maven
>> invocation.
>> The exception is thrown on
d like it might be a bug, but without the ability to
>>> reproduce, it is difficult to say more. One case where it might not be a
>>> bug despite its behavior: where it is reusing gwt-unitCache or the like
>>> from an older version of gwt.
>>>
>>> On Wed,
. I do not want to loose the
advantage of an ImageResource.
David
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Miroslav Pokorny
wrote:
> Hi David
>
> What do you mean by IMG tag, do you mean IMG with a src=/somefile on the
> server ?
>
> --
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web
Hi,
Not sure if I understand that part.
As far as I can see it is handled by the ClippedImageImpl classes or
did it change in 2.1 ? Anyways, as long as I see the correct image I
am a happy man.
David
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:03 PM, John Tamplin wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:14
to ask for non installers
for the IE/Firefox/Chrome plugins that do not mandate an internet
connection :-S. So maybe for the poor corporate developers in very
secure environments that fight to get GWT accepted: think about us!
;-)
David
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 8:48 PM, Eric Ayers wrote:
> Hi D
Hi Eric,
It would be acceptable for testing purpose only. releases to
production have to be official versions. But it would make it soo much
easier to already start using features that should normally be
available by the time we go to production.
David
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Joel
, indeed if this is not deemed important to the GWT team I
can understand.
What is important is that we can have the eclipse plugin/browser
plugins without the need for an active internet connection.
David
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 6:25 PM, John Tamplin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 9:11
can not
get a directory listing there.
Additionally the IE plugin is actually just an empty shell that needs
to go to the internet to download the latest version.
There are some very old versions of the browser plugins available in
the trunk but I guess it was put there one day and totally f
Ok,
I'll keep my fingers crossed!
David
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
>
>
> On Sep 21, 11:44 am, stuckagain wrote:
>> GWT contributors,
>>
>> Will there be a production quality RPC mechanism available in GWT 2.1
>> as part of the
needed interfaces to use the
RequestFactory approach.
David
On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 4:07 PM, BobV wrote:
> RequestFactory is good for any kind of bean-like-object. If you look
> at the DynaTableRf sample, the "backing store" is a trivial list of
> in-memory objects. Th
Why not include Gin in GWT 2.1 ? It could maybe be useful inside the
GWT codebase as well ?
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 5:32 PM, David Chandler wrote:
> Hmmm, I see my comments about GIN in the ActivityMapper have caught up
> with me. I haven't worked this out fully yet, but was
optimisations will remain a
huge selling point ?
David
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
>
>
> On 17 nov, 16:12, dflorey wrote:
>> Hi,
>> as stated in this thread
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit/browse_thread/threa.
a customer is a broad concept :-)
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:04 PM, Stephen Haberman
wrote:
>
>> I complained about the same subject when 2.1 was released. After 2
>> years of waiting very little functionality in the new table was
>> released. I can understand the motivation of the GWT team, but
I didn't get the chance to test it out, due to corporate red tape :-(
David
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 3:51 PM, John LaBanca wrote:
> I'll take a look and make sure we can use the incubator jar with GWT 2.0.
> Thanks,
> John LaBanca
> jlaba...@google.com
>
>
>
Less maintenance on the async, declarative transaction management,
undo, batching, less web.xml tweeking, ... there are many reasons why
we also use a command pattern.
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Miroslav Pokorny
wrote:
> Why use a uber command pattern for all services. This only leads to so
dgets actually fix all issues we had with the
old widgets ?
David
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Lex Spoon wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Ray Ryan wrote:
>>
>> No argument. And since we've never, ever managed to actually delete a
>> deprecated class so far as I know
n has the right for their design choices,
no ? Or can you give the ultimate approach that we all should be using
?
David
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Miroslav Pokorny
wrote:
> Does it really make sense to give all serivices the same intf. Im sure
> because everything comes back to a bi
I hope IE7 will not be dropped in short term. That would be dramatic
for GWT apps that are used in the enterprise environments.
In our case our customers are already very annoyed that we can not
support IE6 decently enough.
David
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Jens wrote:
> -1
> I wou
abandonware as well ?
I'm really starting to regret chosing GWT for development. The only
thing where there are many commits is the compiler optimisations and
code splitting stuff ... in my opinion that is a waste of time since
the browsers are getting faster every day anyway.
David
On Thu,
We are doing development on machines not connected to the internet and I
bet a lot of other GWT devs are in the same situation. So how can
management depend on such a feature to decide on usage ?
David
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, September 3
Not that I have anything of authority here, but why not adopt Guice instead
of all the gwt.xml trickery and call it the Guicy Web ToolKit
David
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Kerry Wilson wrote:
> I would leave gorgeous out of it. I would just consider it a recursive
> acronym li
the
GWT.create for RPC calls.
David
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Reinier Zwitserloot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> I'm not quite happy with the current GWT JSON api. I had something in
> mind similar to what I use for my own server side projects. I built
> that myself
up GWT to more than just Java backends.
David
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 1:33 PM, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There is one extra thing that is missing in JSON in GWT: the possibility to
> use the same JSON API on the server side.
> The current implementation is
And also note, that there is a similar problem when using ImageBundles... I
do not see the images in hosted mode.Does the fix adres this as well ?
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 6:24 PM, Freeland Abbott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Thanks---I (obviously) hadn't checked the bug record, just this thread.
I am sure that there are many bugs that are no longer relevant, but there
are a lot of bugs there that do cause developers to loose a lot of time when
they discover the issue the hard way.
David
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Thomas Broyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On 28 oct,
1.5_011. I then put it
in a WAR and EAR and deploy it on a windows machine with OC4J. Using JDK
1.5_06.
I then launch hosted mode with -noserver and connect to the windows server.
David
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 5:00 PM, John Tamplin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at
ers of a component
and becomes a maintenance problem in the end.
A flag on the TabPanel/DeckPanel would be a better solution, I would just
subclass and make sure that the lazy attachment is used on all our panels.
That I could get away with, but still I find it a pitty that it is not the
default
am not in a hurry to find a new Job so I want to spend my free time to
improve my understanding. Fixing bugs is always the best way to start
understand code the fullest - and I believe that GWT is great for enterprise
development.
David
On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 9:58 PM, Ray Ryan <[EMAIL PROT
I also reported a feature request a long time ago that might be addressed
with the proposed change.
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=1275
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 7:21 AM, Mat Gessel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Excellent write up John.
>
> +1 for the more accessible
with bigger projects: I am
not the only developer and the others do not always look around much when
adding UI components.
As a consequence when I implement something I need to enforce it in one
place and be done with it.
David
On Thu, Dec 4, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Emily Crutcher <[EMAIL PROTEC
Using javascript:'' for any IFRAME should be done as a default, without even
thinking about the possible use.
There were bugs in the past in FormPanel and PopupPanel in IE6 for the exact
same reason.
David
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Emily Crutcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
erate code you can
use in the SWING client).
That way you only need to maintain the properties files.
David
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Marek Gregor wrote:
>
> We use GWT as web client technology for enterprise J2EE system (EJB,
> JAAS, ...) which is also capable to offer swing
According to the JavaDocs of Map.keySet() the change should be reflected to
the Map and the other way around.
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 4:14 PM, todd.sei...@gmail.com <
todd.sei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In the following code web mode removes the object for key "foo1" but
> hosted mode does not see
Hi,
For us the RPC issues (speed, stack overflow, ...) are very critical in our
applications...
But as I understood, they are not considered for the 1.6 release ? (1.7 ?)
David
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Mark Waschkowski wrote:
>
> The following issue affects my entire web applicat
Sounds like a maintenance problem! Time to refactor ?
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, Scott Blum wrote:
> Nobody understands GenerateJavaAST. We just hack on it until it does the
> right thing. :)
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 6:59 PM, Ray Cromwell wrote:
>
>>
>> I think it would be useful to,
started using but only after shielding off
everything about the incubator because we can not afford to change the
applications all of the time (in total we have at least 5 big GWT projects
in development and many new ones are being defined for the future).
David
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 5:21 PM, John
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
