I agree with that, i'm using a generic DTO too with a Map<String,
Object> because i don't want to bother to create an
IServiceInterfaceAsync for every RPC method i need. So telling in an
annotation to GWT which objects are likely to travel over http would
be nice.
However if we could provide something more flexible than annotation
config, it would be nice. My RPC service is part of my framework, and
i don't want to have to modify the API to mark the serializable
implemenation DTOs.
On 18 avr, 22:35, fvisticot <fvisti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1, a way to specify Object to serialize would be fine !!!
>
> On Apr 17, 10:20 pm, Daniel Kurka <kurka.dan...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > this is exactly what i was thinking.
> > we need a way to specify the classes that are okay to serialiaze with the
> > service
>
> > 2009/4/17 Vitali Lovich <vlov...@gmail.com>
>
> > > Hasn't been accepted - just opened. Anyone can open issues against GWT.
>
> > > That being said, I think there could be room for improvement. For
> > > instance, if you specify a serializable interface or serializable abstract
> > > class, you should be allowed to enumerate all the various types that can
> > > possibly go across the wire in anannotationso as to provide more
> > > contextual information that the compiler simply doesn't otherwise have
> > > access to at compile time.
>
> > > @Transfers({A.class, B.class, C.class, D.class})
> > > Serializable foo(Serializable[] x);
>
> > > etc. which limits the compiler to only look at A, B, C, & D when it comes
> > > across trying to compile this RPC function.
>
> > > This would solve a lot of issues & make the expressiveness much more
> > > powerful.
>
> > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:18 AM, Salvador Diaz
> > > <diaz.salva...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > >> Frankly I don't see how that issue could be accepted, the fact that
> > >> you have to mark all your serializable objects as Serializable or
> > >> IsSerializable has been there from the beginning. It's related to the
> > >> way the compiler has to know at compile time what objects are allowed
> > >> to travel through RPCs and how they should be serialized. You simply
> > >> cannot expect it to magically detect the types that will be added to
> > >> your <String, Object> map.
>
> > >> On Apr 16, 10:14 pm, kurka.dan...@googlemail.com wrote:
> > >> > I added my concerns to this issue in the gwt issue tracker:
>
> > >> >http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=3521
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
