@jat - When do you think we'll merge the htmlunit branch into trunk so we can check in this patch?
Thanks, John LaBanca jlaba...@google.com On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Pascal Muetschard <pmuetsch...@google.com>wrote: > I have updated the patch set to also have the benchmark test cases use the > new strategy. Please review it. > When do you think this will make it into the trunk? > > Thanks. > > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Pascal Muetschard <pmuetsch...@google.com > > wrote: > >> FYI, I've uploaded another patch to >> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/71801 with the rename. Thanks for the >> feedback! >> >> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 2:09 PM, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com> wrote: >> >>> I dig @WithProperties to the max. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Pascal Muetschard < >>> pmuetsch...@google.com> wrote: >>> >>>> How about @WithProperties or @WithModuleProperty? Since the module XML >>>> files use <define-property>, <set-property>, <property-provider>, >>>> and <when-property-is>. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:01 AM, John LaBanca <jlaba...@google.com>wrote: >>>> >>>>> @WithClientProperties is fine with me. I thought we used the term >>>>> binding somewhere, but creating a DeferredBinding doesn't actual require >>>>> the >>>>> use of the term binding. The gwt.xml files just refer to these as >>>>> properties. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> John LaBanca >>>>> jlaba...@google.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:57 PM, Bruce Johnson <br...@google.com>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:51 PM, John LaBanca <jlaba...@google.com>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I vote for @WithBindingProperties for the annotation name. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Is that a vote that we should start using the term "binding >>>>>> properties" in general? >>>>>> >>>>>> I think that's not quite the right term (perhaps this should be a >>>>>> separate thread) because increasingly, those properties will affect >>>>>> things >>>>>> like compiler optimization behavior, code splitting, etc. That is, they >>>>>> don't only affect how GWT.create() calls get bound. >>>>>> >>>>>> How about the term "client property"? It is a property that affects >>>>>> what the client receives and is in every case somehow a function of the >>>>>> client that is requesting the script. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Bruce >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
