Hi! Since a big part of our string content comes from database records anyway, we decided to go without any static texts but use dynamic labels. Initial concerns about performance and memory footprint have proven to be unfounded. That is, despite working in the context of European Institutions we go with a single static language and avoid the compile time performance bottleneck of having a large number of permutations. Cheers, Ralph
On Thursday, January 4, 2024 at 1:29:08 AM UTC+1 Alexander Bertram wrote: > Hi there, > We have been using GWT to build our product for a very long time. > Recently, we've faced a new challenge as we've steadily been increasing the > number of supported translations of the application to support a global > audience. We're up to 24 languages, and could conceivably hit 40 in the > coming year. > > With all of these languages, come more permutations! We've stripped away > browser-specific permutations, but we do have a mobile version of the app, > which means that we have 2 x 24 permutations = 48. > > So far, we've addressed this problem by increasing the size of the VM that > builds the app, but even with 16 vCPUs it takes 10-12 minutes to build the > app. I'm experimenting with increasing to 32 vCPUs, but so far I can't get > the build time to drop linearly. > > Anyone else out there using alternate strategies? Is it worth trying to > create some sort of distributed cache from the intermediate files the > compiler writes out? Load translations dynamically at runtime instead? Or > just through more hardware at it :-) > > Just curious to hear what others are doing? > > Best, > Alex > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit/d483e663-1aa5-4bc7-a841-0660073c8a69n%40googlegroups.com.
