If you look at the first few lines of web_socket.js, you'll notice the line "if (window.WebSocket) return;". This is why I didn't do a conditional load.
You're approach is probably better in the long run because it keeps everything contained in the WebSocket package. -Tad On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 9:58 PM, dougx <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually on a second look, I'm not sure that's the right approach. > > What you're doing is replacing the WebSocket with the flash > implementation in all cases, even when the client supports the native > web socket. > > I think we should split WebSocketImpl out of /gwt_src/com/google/gwt/ > websockets/client/WebSocket.java and have a detect / create based on > the browser capabilities. > > Obvious issues that spring to mind; it won't run on an ipad otherwise. > > ~ > Doug. > > On Sep 27, 12:43 pm, dougx <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yup, pretty much identical to the port I did yesterday (except I used > > client resource to bundle the swf and javascript files). > > > > Nice, didn't realize that was there. Still doesn't work for me though; > > did you get this working? > > I merged your changes into a clean branch, but ff still doesn't want > > to play... > > > > ~ > > Doug. > > > > On Sep 27, 4:24 am, Tad Glines <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I created a branch several months ago that had a web-socket-js working. > The name of the branch/clone is tadglines-webaockets. It's based off the > io2010 branch but it should be trivial to merge. > > > > > I created it the same day that someone at google wished for it on this > list. But I think it got lost in the shuffle. > > > > > -Tad > > > > > On Sep 26, 2010, at 3:47 AM, dougx <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > So, > > > > > > I've portedhttp://github.com/gimite/web-socket-jsintothe wave- > > > > protocol's GWT websocket implementation so the client works with > > > > firefox, etc. > > > > > > woo. > > > > > > ..but although it seems to talk it doesn't actually work. :( It just > > > > sits on 'Never Connected' status in firefox. > > > > > > The console log is showing: > > > > > > [WebSocket] policy file: xmlsocket://192.168.1.10:843 > > > > [WebSocket] Flash object is ready > > > > [WebSocket] FABridge initializad > > > > [WebSocket] connected > > > > [WebSocket] request header: GET /socket HTTP/1.1 Upgrade: WebSocket > > > > Connection: Upgrade Host: 192.168.1.10:9898 Origin: > http://192.168.1.10:9898 > > > > Cookie: Sec-WebSocket-Key1: 28 `50e7kptb 6v (35=-1 8U Sec-WebSocket- > > > > Key2: 2i58 5 334H 8 6' E 4' > > > > [WebSocket] sent key3: -µ”£Îªç… > > > > [WebSocket] response header: HTTP/1.1 101 WebSocket Protocol > Handshake > > > > Upgrade: WebSocket Connection: Upgrade Sec-WebSocket-Origin: > > > >http://192.168.1.10:9898Sec-WebSocket-Location:ws:// > 192.168.1.10:9898/socket > > > > [WebSocket] reply digest: ÿICú 8¼ ‡gPÈ” õî > > > > > > O_o I haven't had time to dig into what that might mean on the socket > > > > comm protocol; anyone here have some idea? > > > > > > I recall some discussion about protocol versions or something? > > > > > > Other things: > > > > > > As described here, a policy file service needs to run: > > > >http://www.lightsphere.com/dev/articles/flash_socket_policy.html > > > > > > At the moment I'm just running a separate script on the server to > > > > handle that, but it seems like a dumb solution. Seems like Fedone > > > > should handle this, but it's a bit hacky to be opening other port > just > > > > for flash websocket support. > > > > > > thoughts? > > > > > > Also, how should the code base handle the swf source? At the moment > > > > I've just dumped the binary into: > > > > wave-protocol/src/com/google/gwt/websockets/client/binary/ > > > > > > ...but that also seems like a poor long term solution. > > > > > > ~ > > > > Doug. > > > > > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Wave Protocol" group. > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<wave-protocol%[email protected]> > . > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// > groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Wave Protocol" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<wave-protocol%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave Protocol" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.
