Yes lgtm to cameron's change, sorry I ignored email for a while.
On Nov 10, 2008 6:08 PM, "Lex Spoon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Kelly Norton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For iframe loading, Came... Can I consider that an LGTM? > However, I am wondering how this is going to work > in the xs case where the code is loaded into... No, that sounds like a problem all right. For independent reasons, using XHR instead of script tags sounds better, anyway. The downloaded result could then be eval-ed in the correct scope. That strategy would seem to work fine for the XS linker, so long as the call to eval happens within the anonymous function. Lex --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
