1) gwt-jscore is a small Implementation of DOM Element and JS functionality
standard, this is a test, This project will not be Necessary When is
Implemented Elements 2.0, but for the moment I need this.
Many things about this project can change as conforming JsInterop.
For example:
The callback functions are complex (syntactically) to create, with the
lambda sintaxys will be much simpler.
The factories disappear, thanks to static methods on interfaces.
They may have particular implementations based on the prototypes
generated by APT (hopefully :))
They can have default methods on interfaces ..
All thanks to java 8.
If I'm wrong about something please: @Ray Cromwell or/and @Goktug,
correct me.
2) as saying "ray" you're right on the gwt-jquery project.
Thanks!
El sábado, 4 de octubre de 2014 12:18:08 UTC-3, confile escribió:
>
> Consider the following static JavaScript function:
>
> THREE.ImageUtils = {
> loadTexture: function (url) { ... }
>
> }
>
> The way I use to create the static function with JsInterop is to create an
> interface for ImageUtils and then create an inner abstract class MyStatic
> which contains the static methods implemented with JSNI.
>
> Here is an example of the above class:
>
> @JsType
> public interface ImageUtils {
>
> public static abstract class MyStatic {
>
> public static native Texture create(String url) /*-{
> return new $wnd.THREE.ImageUtils.loadTexture(url);
> }-*/;
> }
>
> }
>
>
> I don't think this is the best solution. Is there a better way to handle
> static functions with JsInterop?
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT
Contributors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/2cd18033-7aaa-404e-9e91-7bd87a9723e9%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
