Hi I have being following this thread with great attention. Current status for my project is that we have used gwt-ext alot last couple of months and we think it looks really good (extjs is a very nice look and feel)
However due to thing also mentined in this thread, I am also looking for different ways to go. I would like to have a "javascript wrapper" free solution In my searching i also found gwt-mosaic, which I think is a nice alternative, but It would require our users to get "used to yet another" look and feel. So I have the last couple of days, played around with the standard GWT widgets, tweaked them a little as we normally do :-), and applied the CSS and images of EXT-GWT. I actually think that it looks very well. At least my users and developers was not able to see the difference, between ext-gwt solution and my "pure gwt" solution. I have so far converted buttons, panel with collapse and toolbar input fields, and tabs. My experience with css is VERY limited, but with my progress sofar, I believe it is possible to acheive the whole application, because sofar we use a very small number of different components. Do any of you guys see any value in this? For me it means that we are now more free to extend components in a more OO like, way and we now have possibility to take in other 3part libraries based on pure gwt. and also, the development turnaround in hosted mode is by far quicker. /Flemming On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Miles T. <dupont.nico...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 23 déc, 15:08, nogridbag <nogrid...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 1) Use of generics. If you're like me you rather work with POJO's > > everywhere and have type safety. > > +1. Fortunately, you can use POJOs, as said above. > AFAIK, generics issues will be fixed in 2.0 release. > > > > > Many of the examples don't even use generics. > > > > 2) The GXT components are not easily extendable. In Swing terms, > > imagine if you extend JLabel and override paintComponent. Instead of > > rendering a label you render a red square. Nothing breaks and you > > have your nice shiny square. If you take a GXT button and override > > onRender with a completely new impl, chances are you will break > > several things. Other methods in the class depend on certain elements > > to exist in the DOM or certain styles to exist in the Elements. If > > you plan on using GXT's components as is or customizing the CSS > > slightly you should be fine. > > > > On Dec 22, 10:40 pm, "Fred Janon" <fja...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I just wonder what people would like to see in a GWT library: what > widgets, > > > what features? I guess a nice look and feel for a start, but what else? > > > > > > 4) There's some really iffy design decisions. > > > > > What do you consider iffy design choices? > > > > > Fred > > > > > On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 11:45, nogridbag <nogrid...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I've been using GXT (Ext-GWT) for quite some time now. While it > > > > certainly looks nice and provides a good amount of functionality > > > > lacking in GWT, there are several drawbacks. > > > > > > 1) It is very buggy. Bugs get fixed fairly fast, which is good, but > I > > > > find myself submitting an abnormally large amount of bugs. While the > > > > developer (singular) is very responsive, passionate about his work, > > > > and friendly, the code isn't exactly up to the standards that was > > > > hoping for. > > > > > > 2) It is not just a set of widgets, it's a complete framework on top > > > > of GWT. Your team will have to invest time to learn it. > > > > Intermingling GWT widgets and GXT widgets is possible, but confusing > > > > IMHO. Which leads me to my next issue. > > > > > > 3) Documentation is still very lacking, although they're working on > > > > it... > > > > > > 4) There's some really iffy design decisions. > > > > a) The use of generics is not only inconsistent, but in many cases > > > > it's not even possible to use generics due to API bugs. The example > I > > > > was going to post was actually just fixed in the release today. > > > > b) While the widgets look nice and performance is OK, you are forced > > > > to back the GXT components (like Grid, Tree, List) with GXT specific > > > > data model objects. If you have a simple Employee POJO, and you want > > > > to add it to a GXT Grid, you have to either wrap it in a Model or > > > > ModelData class, or you have to implement a marker interface and do a > > > > bit of trickery to get it in the Grid. The only reason for all of > > > > this is to support binding (since GWT doesn't support reflection). I > > > > would much rather have preferred a Swing like TableModel and an > > > > optional binding layer on top of it. > > > > c) The widgets look nice out of the box and customizing them slightly > > > > with CSS is pretty easy. However, if the changes require you to > alter > > > > the HTML of a GXT component, you're in for a world of pain. The HTML > > > > markup is tied heavily into the functionality of the widgets and is > > > > referenced throughout the class either by tag name, tag id, or by css > > > > "class". IMHO, the UI should be completely separate from the > > > > functionality of the widgets. > > > > > > 5) Size. The CSS itself is ~80k. > > > > > > On the plus side, it's nice to have a pure GWT library in which I can > > > > step into Java code (which you will have to do quite often!). The > > > > widgets look and function very nicely. It would take a lot of time > > > > and money to write many of the widgets GXT provides. If you plan on > > > > using it as is, it works fine. > > > > > > On Dec 19, 10:13 am, "Juan Backson" <juanback...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > I have been using GWT for almost 6 months now. In the past six > months, I > > > > > have tried migrating code from pure GWT to GWT-EXT and then to > Smart-GWT. > > > > > > > They all have drawback: > > > > > > > GWT - no good looking widget > > > > > GWT-Ext - very buggy and GPL licensing > > > > > Smart-GWT - slow and memory intensive > > > > > > > Is there any library that has the same capability of Smart-GWT and > good > > > > > performance? > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > JB > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to Google-Web-Toolkit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
