On Saturday, December 22, 2012 2:50:00 AM UTC+1, Goktug Gokdogan wrote: > > GWT's built-in library space is already bloated and getting harder to > maintain. Inside GWT, we need to do less but do better. > And good thing is, a lot of stuff doesn't need to be baked in; like > the protocol buffers; it is a valuable feature but I personally don't see > GWT having it as a first class citizen; at least in the near term. > On the other hand we can definitely help out on removing any blockers and > support anybody who would like to implement it as a 3rd party library. >
+1 Wondering what Google is doing though ;-) Are you somehow generating, say, RequestFactory ValueProxy-s from .proto files? It looks like what BobV was planning. > It looks like there is enough demand, why don't you guys start a project > for that? > Feel free to continue protobuf-gwt where I left it, I can add committers/owners if anyone's interested (let's discuss it in https://groups.google.com/d/forum/protobuf-gwt then) I wonder whether it would make sense to support the binary serialization using TypedArrays in browsers that support them. As for generating client code, the patch I made was never merged into protobuf, so wrt codegen, I think I'd rather use the approach taken by Wave: use protoc to generate "normal" Java classes, then load the classes and use the protobuf "reflection" API to generate GWT-specific implementations. -- 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/-/vj4wP3pdv3MJ. 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.
