This is not a complete review, but some initial feedback: - Shouldn't the selenium changes be part of a separate patch? Regardless, Freeland or Eric would be better to review that portion. - Did you read the GWTC<http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/browse_thread/thread/866faa00c999069/703f4dfa4d5ab1b7> threads<http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/msg/eb3e5cee315a4e25>about trying to do this in GWT 1.4? The consensus was that it was not safe to rely on being able to remove all properties, and that even if it were possible it would be fragile to future browser changes (the second thread has a test HTML file, though it is missing __proto__). I think you will need to rely on a prefix, just as we do in FastStringMap. At there very least, you should include "__proto__", "prototype", "constructor", "toString", "watch", "unwatch", and "valueOf" in your test. An alternative would be to not attempt to clean up things like that and simply document that no JS-defined property can be used in the string, though that seems problematic. - Are you sure the complexity regarding a separate hosted-mode implementation is justified? Aside from more opportunities for errors, it means two separate implementations are not tested to be exactly the same, so any holes in the tests are an opportunity for divergent behavior in hosted mode. - Missing newlines at the end of all the .gwt.xml files.
-- John A. Tamplin Software Engineer (GWT), Google --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
