Just wanted to add: It seems this annotation already exists to an extent: http://docs.guava-libraries.googlecode.com/git-history/release/javadoc/index.html
http://docs.guava-libraries.googlecode.com/git-history/release/javadoc/com/google/common/annotations/GwtCompatible.html http://docs.guava-libraries.googlecode.com/git-history/release/javadoc/com/google/common/annotations/GwtIncompatible.html On Saturday, September 15, 2012 4:34:48 PM UTC+2, RyanZA wrote: > > Better way to handle this would be great.. > > Obvious response to this is "have unit tests to check if gwt-rpc works for > each class". This gives a problem in complex object graphs with > multiple descendants where some are meant to be used over gwt-rpc and some > aren't, etc. > > Having the compiler check every RPC async interface also isn't the right > answer because of inheritance and other issues. > > We should really have an annotation, something like '@GWT-Entity' perhaps, > that could be tagged onto a class to mark it for use in GWT-RPC and would > be validated by the compiler to make sure it is usable over gwt-rpc. It can > be fully optional too, so classes without @GWT-Entity could still be > serialized but generate a warning to tell the user the class hasn't been > marked. So then it would be fully backwards compatible. > > On Friday, September 14, 2012 5:06:16 PM UTC+2, Joseph Lust wrote: >> >> A number of times we've run into serialization exceptions with GWT-RPC. >> Of course following the serialization policies for GWT-RPC to the letter >> can prevent this, but not all of our devs are keen on these. >> >> Since the compiler sees every RPC async interface, and is compiling those >> objects passed via the interface, is it possible to detect RPC >> serialization issues at compile time rather than runtime when it is first >> used? Seems like the compiler should be able to do this but I've not been >> able to find a setting for it. That would save folks time and make using >> GWT-RPC less error prone. Heck, adding it to the GWT Eclipse Plugin for >> automated error checking would be even more useful. >> >> Thanks for any tips or tricks you may be able to provide. :) >> >> >> >> Sincerely, >> Joseph >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/PC5bivTpFKUJ. 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.
