Re: Vaadin 7 Released
Quite little this far. Vaadin 7 project took a lot longer to finish than we anticipated and thus we have been quite busy doing everything else than GWT. I hope we are able to start contributing more now. Probably the most visible contribution was the future of gwt market study. Next we'll be working on (and contributing to GWT) various IE10 support related things. The aim is to have full IE10 support (including WP8). On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Ed post2edb...@gmail.com wrote: Can you give a list of what Vaadin has contributed back to GWT the last year ? - Ed -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Dr. Joonas Lehtinen, CEO Vaadin - http://vaadin.com/ FI: +358-40-5035001, US: (415) 513-0739, Skype: joonaslehtinen Office: Vaadin Oy, Ruukinkatu 2-4, 20540, Turku, Finland Twitter: https://twitter.com/joonaslehtinen LinkedIn: http://fi.linkedin.com/in/joonaslehtinen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
How to make EditTextCell fit the whole width of cellWidth?
Hi, I have a CellTable and would like the entry fields to behave like a excel/spreadsheet table. I'm using EditTextCell columns. But when I click an entry, the TextInput has not the same alignment than the underlying label entry. I don't know why gwt does not provide this behaviour out of the box, as probably everyone would require this when using an editable table. Anyhow, how can I overcome this and make the input size exactly fit the cell entry? Thanks -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT RPC future ?
Thomas and Paul, Thanks for all the info, I will certainly look into these alternatives. The only problem is that somehow GWT should include a fast generic RPC mechanism. I hate having to depend on 3rd party alternatives that are often writen by one individual to solve his own issue and never maintained. I am writing banking software and we have some strict requirements on what products we are allowed to use since we have some very tight end-user licenses that requires us to fix issues very quickly. But somehow RPC is fundamental to AJAX apps build on GWT and it is a shame that we have almost no support for JSON-REST kind of APIs since that is what most people seem to be using. David On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 5:17:33 PM UTC+1, Thomas Broyer wrote: On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 4:37:35 PM UTC+1, stuckagain wrote: Hi, Not sure where to ask this question, but I was wondering if the GWT devs every plan to fix the inefficient GWT-RPC ? The problem happens mostly on IE (all versions), although I assume other browsers might benefit as well since a lot of cpu cycles are wasted on things that should be trivial for a browser. I had to improve multiple GWT apps that all stumble on these 3 problems: - deserialisation is terribly inefficient - it can take many seconds to serialize small sets of data, - on IE I can get slow script warnings - I sometimes get stack over flows with deeply nested structures. For example when I send over a tree of 1 nodes (takes 20ms to create), it takes 5 seconds or more to deserialize. (I can give you a demo app that shows the problem) I only get 2 seconds to impress my users, and I need to do quite a lot of operations besides sending the RPC. I've heared the reactions multiple times: don't send soo much data over, but bytewise this is not soo much. It is highly compressible (just a few K in fact) data. We want to process complex data structures in the client, we don't want to create intermediate data structures to bypass the RPC inefficiencies. There have been multiple attempts from google to write something better (DeRPC whichi is now deprecated, and RequestFactory which is very badly documented so I don't even know if I could reuse this one for generic RPC calls). Indeed RequestFactory can be used for generic RPC. Have a look at http://tbroyer.posterous.com/gwt-211-requestfactory and http://tbroyer.posterous.com/gwt-211-requestfactory-part-ii It's rather old and might be inaccurate in a few places (hasn't been updated for GWT 2.4's use of annotation-processing at compile-time, for instance). Is it not time to start using json as the base format for GWT RPC ? I would even like to help out to get this working! It is really a pitty that somehow RPC is a selling point for GWT but in reality it often becomes the bottleneck of your application. Can't we maybe put GWT RPC on the framework for request factory ? One issue I also have with GWT RPC (but less pressing as the performanceissue) is the fact that it is not very friendly for mixing different client technologies. If it were a simple json REST payload (without obfuscation and lots of secret numbers) then we could easily reuse it everwhere, it would also make it soo much easier for loadtesting. Not a lot of tools support GWT RPC easily. RequestFactory can easily be used in-process within tests, and ships with a pure-Java client (usable on Android for instance). It comes with 2 dialects under the same API: its own RequestFactory protocol (JSON-based) that deals with batching of method calls and sending only diffs for entities, and JSON-RPC. The server-side component only supports the former dialect though, the latter is only about using existing JSON-RPC services (such as Google APIs) from a Java or GWT app. That said, I doubt RequestFactory would perform better for your 1 nodes use-case (I think we can even say it will perform much worse than RPC; this can probably be improved by doing more codegen at compile-time and less reflection at runtime, but I'm not sure it'd even be better than RPC; this is mostly about the server-side though, and possibly DevMode too; it should be an all different story if you use the JSON-RPC dialect). An alternative to RPC and RF, using (a slightly modified) JSON-RPC protocol with an RPC-like API is gwt-json-rpc, used by Gerrit: https://gerrit.googlesource.com/gwtjsonrpc/ You'll find the JAR in a Maven repo at https://gerrit-maven-repository.googlecode.com/svn/ (Gerrit itself references https://gerrit-maven.commondatastorage.googleapis.comso I think the googlecode repo is an old one; the commondatastorage.googleapis one is not browsable though so it's hard to tell which artifacts are in there). Look at the README file for details. Finally, it's a bit old (almost 4 years old) but it should still apply as you're talking about
CellTable hovering style for single entry?
Hi, I know I can change the hovering style for a whole column in a CellTable using .cellTableHoveredRowCell. But how can I define hovering border only of the actual hovered entry of a column? Is that even possible? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT RPC future ?
I too am very interested in this. I absolutely do not want to jump over to RequestFactory. I love GWT-RPC and I use it in conjunction with the Command Pattern action/result wrapper. I haven't seen any problems with GWT-RPC in terms of performance as I don't currently have any high payloads (except I do have one large payload that comes across soon after app load). So not a huge issues for me, but I also love to see higher performance especially when it is baked into gwt core. Although I do plan to explore gwtjsonrpc over the next few weeks. @paul, do you have sharable resources on your mechanism and possibly any suggestions?? Thanks! -at On Thursday, February 7, 2013 5:47:34 AM UTC-5, stuckagain wrote: Thomas and Paul, Thanks for all the info, I will certainly look into these alternatives. The only problem is that somehow GWT should include a fast generic RPC mechanism. I hate having to depend on 3rd party alternatives that are often writen by one individual to solve his own issue and never maintained. I am writing banking software and we have some strict requirements on what products we are allowed to use since we have some very tight end-user licenses that requires us to fix issues very quickly. But somehow RPC is fundamental to AJAX apps build on GWT and it is a shame that we have almost no support for JSON-REST kind of APIs since that is what most people seem to be using. David On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 5:17:33 PM UTC+1, Thomas Broyer wrote: On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 4:37:35 PM UTC+1, stuckagain wrote: Hi, Not sure where to ask this question, but I was wondering if the GWT devs every plan to fix the inefficient GWT-RPC ? The problem happens mostly on IE (all versions), although I assume other browsers might benefit as well since a lot of cpu cycles are wasted on things that should be trivial for a browser. I had to improve multiple GWT apps that all stumble on these 3 problems: - deserialisation is terribly inefficient - it can take many seconds to serialize small sets of data, - on IE I can get slow script warnings - I sometimes get stack over flows with deeply nested structures. For example when I send over a tree of 1 nodes (takes 20ms to create), it takes 5 seconds or more to deserialize. (I can give you a demo app that shows the problem) I only get 2 seconds to impress my users, and I need to do quite a lot of operations besides sending the RPC. I've heared the reactions multiple times: don't send soo much data over, but bytewise this is not soo much. It is highly compressible (just a few K in fact) data. We want to process complex data structures in the client, we don't want to create intermediate data structures to bypass the RPC inefficiencies. There have been multiple attempts from google to write something better (DeRPC whichi is now deprecated, and RequestFactory which is very badly documented so I don't even know if I could reuse this one for generic RPC calls). Indeed RequestFactory can be used for generic RPC. Have a look at http://tbroyer.posterous.com/gwt-211-requestfactory and http://tbroyer.posterous.com/gwt-211-requestfactory-part-ii It's rather old and might be inaccurate in a few places (hasn't been updated for GWT 2.4's use of annotation-processing at compile-time, for instance). Is it not time to start using json as the base format for GWT RPC ? I would even like to help out to get this working! It is really a pitty that somehow RPC is a selling point for GWT but in reality it often becomes the bottleneck of your application. Can't we maybe put GWT RPC on the framework for request factory ? One issue I also have with GWT RPC (but less pressing as the performanceissue) is the fact that it is not very friendly for mixing different client technologies. If it were a simple json REST payload (without obfuscation and lots of secret numbers) then we could easily reuse it everwhere, it would also make it soo much easier for loadtesting. Not a lot of tools support GWT RPC easily. RequestFactory can easily be used in-process within tests, and ships with a pure-Java client (usable on Android for instance). It comes with 2 dialects under the same API: its own RequestFactory protocol (JSON-based) that deals with batching of method calls and sending only diffs for entities, and JSON-RPC. The server-side component only supports the former dialect though, the latter is only about using existing JSON-RPC services (such as Google APIs) from a Java or GWT app. That said, I doubt RequestFactory would perform better for your 1 nodes use-case (I think we can even say it will perform much worse than RPC; this can probably be improved by doing more codegen at compile-time and less reflection at runtime, but I'm not sure it'd even be better than RPC; this is mostly about the server-side though, and possibly
Re: GWT RPC future ?
There is always RestyGWT - http://restygwt.fusesource.org/ I've been using it recently and it works very nicely in combination with Jersey. I'm not sure on speed compared to GWT-RPC though, you'd need to test. I haven't had any speed problems so far though. RestyGWT will let you use raw json responses though, which should be very performant for your 10K nodes, while also letting you use java objects for regular requests. Using Jersey for your server also lets you create standard RESTful services that can be easily consumed by iOS clients/other websites/etc. On Thursday, February 7, 2013 12:47:34 PM UTC+2, stuckagain wrote: Thomas and Paul, Thanks for all the info, I will certainly look into these alternatives. The only problem is that somehow GWT should include a fast generic RPC mechanism. I hate having to depend on 3rd party alternatives that are often writen by one individual to solve his own issue and never maintained. I am writing banking software and we have some strict requirements on what products we are allowed to use since we have some very tight end-user licenses that requires us to fix issues very quickly. But somehow RPC is fundamental to AJAX apps build on GWT and it is a shame that we have almost no support for JSON-REST kind of APIs since that is what most people seem to be using. David On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 5:17:33 PM UTC+1, Thomas Broyer wrote: On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 4:37:35 PM UTC+1, stuckagain wrote: Hi, Not sure where to ask this question, but I was wondering if the GWT devs every plan to fix the inefficient GWT-RPC ? The problem happens mostly on IE (all versions), although I assume other browsers might benefit as well since a lot of cpu cycles are wasted on things that should be trivial for a browser. I had to improve multiple GWT apps that all stumble on these 3 problems: - deserialisation is terribly inefficient - it can take many seconds to serialize small sets of data, - on IE I can get slow script warnings - I sometimes get stack over flows with deeply nested structures. For example when I send over a tree of 1 nodes (takes 20ms to create), it takes 5 seconds or more to deserialize. (I can give you a demo app that shows the problem) I only get 2 seconds to impress my users, and I need to do quite a lot of operations besides sending the RPC. I've heared the reactions multiple times: don't send soo much data over, but bytewise this is not soo much. It is highly compressible (just a few K in fact) data. We want to process complex data structures in the client, we don't want to create intermediate data structures to bypass the RPC inefficiencies. There have been multiple attempts from google to write something better (DeRPC whichi is now deprecated, and RequestFactory which is very badly documented so I don't even know if I could reuse this one for generic RPC calls). Indeed RequestFactory can be used for generic RPC. Have a look at http://tbroyer.posterous.com/gwt-211-requestfactory and http://tbroyer.posterous.com/gwt-211-requestfactory-part-ii It's rather old and might be inaccurate in a few places (hasn't been updated for GWT 2.4's use of annotation-processing at compile-time, for instance). Is it not time to start using json as the base format for GWT RPC ? I would even like to help out to get this working! It is really a pitty that somehow RPC is a selling point for GWT but in reality it often becomes the bottleneck of your application. Can't we maybe put GWT RPC on the framework for request factory ? One issue I also have with GWT RPC (but less pressing as the performanceissue) is the fact that it is not very friendly for mixing different client technologies. If it were a simple json REST payload (without obfuscation and lots of secret numbers) then we could easily reuse it everwhere, it would also make it soo much easier for loadtesting. Not a lot of tools support GWT RPC easily. RequestFactory can easily be used in-process within tests, and ships with a pure-Java client (usable on Android for instance). It comes with 2 dialects under the same API: its own RequestFactory protocol (JSON-based) that deals with batching of method calls and sending only diffs for entities, and JSON-RPC. The server-side component only supports the former dialect though, the latter is only about using existing JSON-RPC services (such as Google APIs) from a Java or GWT app. That said, I doubt RequestFactory would perform better for your 1 nodes use-case (I think we can even say it will perform much worse than RPC; this can probably be improved by doing more codegen at compile-time and less reflection at runtime, but I'm not sure it'd even be better than RPC; this is mostly about the server-side though, and possibly DevMode too; it should be an all different story if you use the JSON-RPC dialect).
Re: How to embrace asynchrony in GWT apps?
jQuery and other javascript frameworks use Promises/Futures (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futures_and_promises) to make asynchronous
calls more readable and workable.
Unfortunately AFAIK there is nothing like that in GWT.
The next best alternative is to use eventBus like RyanZA explained it.
On Tuesday, February 5, 2013 3:53:22 PM UTC+1, andy_p1 wrote:
I read it and heard it from GWT gurus that because of the nature of AJAX
apps, we should embrace the asynchronous nature of the calls. I understand
the concept but I am not 100% sure about how to design the following
requirement:
My View displays some data that is produced using the combination of some
data from an RPC call and some data from local (it's a mobile app, so it
gets some data from local file or db). The Presenter is supposed to get all
the required data and refresh the view.
Now, I want to wrap all these individual calls (one call to RPC and one
call to fetch local data), into a single call in a Facade. So ideally, in
my Presenter, i want to call :
facade.getAllData( new MyCallBackHander(){
void onFailure(){ }
void onSuccess(){
update the model and call refresh on the view
}
} );
I am not sure if this is the right approach. I would like to use this
pattern for all the calls made by various Presenters and I am not sure how
to make it generic and how to code the getAllData method in the facade.
Please help.
thank you!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: How to download a file from server without browser opening new window?
You realize you are telling it to open in a new, _blank, window? If you tell it to open in _self you won't see the extra window open. This brings on another issue though, if the browser decides the file can be opened internally, your user will end up losing their current state, assuming the app is not setup to reload correctly. On Friday, February 1, 2013 10:57:06 AM UTC-5, membersound wrote: Hi, I created a servlet that provides a downloadable file (from String content) by writing to the ServletOutputStream. On the client side, I trigger the file download by an Anchor with: Window.open(GWT.getModuleBaseURL() + MyServlet, _blank, ); It works fine, BUT it seems to open a new browser window, which is somehow directly closed. After this the file download dialog is show. How can I prevent this flickering of a new browser window? Can't I achieve this somehow inline? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: How to embrace asynchrony in GWT apps?
There is a project for using Futures in GWT -
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-async-future/
However, an event bus is still a better pattern for this, as futures are
just nicer syntax for single async tasks, and what is needed here is a
method to de-couple the data calls so you don't need to be concerned if the
data comes from RPC or local storage - along with the other benefits of an
event bus.
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Ümit Seren uemit.se...@gmail.com wrote:
jQuery and other javascript frameworks use Promises/Futures (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futures_and_promises) to make asynchronous
calls more readable and workable.
Unfortunately AFAIK there is nothing like that in GWT.
The next best alternative is to use eventBus like RyanZA explained it.
On Tuesday, February 5, 2013 3:53:22 PM UTC+1, andy_p1 wrote:
I read it and heard it from GWT gurus that because of the nature of AJAX
apps, we should embrace the asynchronous nature of the calls. I understand
the concept but I am not 100% sure about how to design the following
requirement:
My View displays some data that is produced using the combination of some
data from an RPC call and some data from local (it's a mobile app, so it
gets some data from local file or db). The Presenter is supposed to get all
the required data and refresh the view.
Now, I want to wrap all these individual calls (one call to RPC and one
call to fetch local data), into a single call in a Facade. So ideally, in
my Presenter, i want to call :
facade.getAllData( new MyCallBackHander(){
void onFailure(){ }
void onSuccess(){
update the model and call refresh on the view
}
} );
I am not sure if this is the right approach. I would like to use this
pattern for all the calls made by various Presenters and I am not sure how
to make it generic and how to code the getAllData method in the facade.
Please help.
thank you!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: CellTable hovering style for single entry?
And further questions:
.cellTableKeyboardSelectedCell {
border: selectionBorderWidth solid black;
}
When I press ENTER and while changing the content, I want the border to be
dashed:
border: selectionBorderWidth dashed black;
How could I implement this, as there is no property in CellTable for this?
Thanks
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Non-trivial examples for UI Binder with pure HTML
Hi there, It has been said that using too many widgets leads to poor performance because of the overhead associated with it. But just about all the examples I have seen use widgets. There are Hello World examples using pure HTML, but it really does not get into the details with presenter, event handling, callback, etc. Anyone knows such examples? I think the widget approach tends to appeal to Java programmers, that is why most of us do that way. Thanks, Yan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
How to change css style during runtime?
Hi,
how can I change a specific css style property during runtime?
I have a CellTable.Resource to define cellTable style MyCellTable.css.
Now I want to change a specific css property during runtime.
.cellTableKeyboardSelectedCell {
border:
}
How can I access my css file during runtime and change that specific
property?
Probably it has to do with cellTable.setStylePrimaryName(), but I could not
figure out how I could achieve this.
Thanks
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT Benchmarks, Java Virtual Machine vs GWT+browser JsVM
Hi, in fact I have not specied not used particular optimization arguments. I have not disabled CastChecking and ClassMetadata, and I have not explicitly set the optimization level (but the default is the maximum value). By using defaults my current configuration is: *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingfalse/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatafalse/disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilerfalse/enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=native / About the first two options, I dunno know If it is correct to disable them in order to do a fair comparison. I suppose that those features should be useful in a real production enviroment, am I right?What is you opinion? The only option I'm going to enable in the next benchmark update is the new enableClosureCompiler. I'm open to suggetions and criticism. Regards Il giorno mercoledì 6 febbraio 2013 10:21:46 UTC+1, Sachin Shekhar R ha scritto: I am not sure whether you turned on all GWT compiler arguments and some turn off some Dev specific GWT features. *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingtrue/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatatrue/disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilertrue/enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* - set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=strip / On Sunday, February 3, 2013 6:20:40 AM UTC+5:30, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Hi, I have wrote a simple benchmark suite in java and I have run with JavaSE 1.7.0 and, thanks to GWT, I have run the same code on Firefox,Chrome,MSIE and Opera. My results, with the experiment details are published here:http://thegoodcodeinn.blogspot.it/2013/02/gwt-benchmarks-gwtjsvm-vs-javavm.html You know, Javascript VM have highly improved recently but how good is GWT at compiling java into Javascript? And.. how efficient is the GWT compiled code+JsVM compared to Java bytecode running on a Java Virtual Machine?? I was just curious about. Hope you like this experiment, comments are appreciated. Have fun Fabiano PS: My benchmark is oriented to numeric, data crunching; no multimedia. I'll also release the benchmark code later.. if requested. I'm only a bit lazy at the moment. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT Benchmarks, Java Virtual Machine vs GWT+browser JsVM
For sure we release production code with the following flags - disableCastCheckingtrue/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatatrue/disableClassMetadata Also you don't specify what version of IE you are testing with, I assume IE9 On Thursday, February 7, 2013 10:10:54 AM UTC-5, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Hi, in fact I have not specied not used particular optimization arguments. I have not disabled CastChecking and ClassMetadata, and I have not explicitly set the optimization level (but the default is the maximum value). By using defaults my current configuration is: *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingfalse/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatafalse/disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilerfalse/enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=native / About the first two options, I dunno know If it is correct to disable them in order to do a fair comparison. I suppose that those features should be useful in a real production enviroment, am I right?What is you opinion? The only option I'm going to enable in the next benchmark update is the new enableClosureCompiler. I'm open to suggetions and criticism. Regards Il giorno mercoledì 6 febbraio 2013 10:21:46 UTC+1, Sachin Shekhar R ha scritto: I am not sure whether you turned on all GWT compiler arguments and some turn off some Dev specific GWT features. *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingtrue/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatatrue/disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilertrue/enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* - set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=strip / On Sunday, February 3, 2013 6:20:40 AM UTC+5:30, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Hi, I have wrote a simple benchmark suite in java and I have run with JavaSE 1.7.0 and, thanks to GWT, I have run the same code on Firefox,Chrome,MSIE and Opera. My results, with the experiment details are published here:http://thegoodcodeinn.blogspot.it/2013/02/gwt-benchmarks-gwtjsvm-vs-javavm.html You know, Javascript VM have highly improved recently but how good is GWT at compiling java into Javascript? And.. how efficient is the GWT compiled code+JsVM compared to Java bytecode running on a Java Virtual Machine?? I was just curious about. Hope you like this experiment, comments are appreciated. Have fun Fabiano PS: My benchmark is oriented to numeric, data crunching; no multimedia. I'll also release the benchmark code later.. if requested. I'm only a bit lazy at the moment. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT Benchmarks, Java Virtual Machine vs GWT+browser JsVM
Ouput is OBFUSCATED ;-) Il giorno giovedì 7 febbraio 2013 16:10:54 UTC+1, Fabiano Tarlao ha scritto: Hi, in fact I have not specied not used particular optimization arguments. I have not disabled CastChecking and ClassMetadata, and I have not explicitly set the optimization level (but the default is the maximum value). By using defaults my current configuration is: *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingfalse/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatafalse/disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilerfalse/enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=native / About the first two options, I dunno know If it is correct to disable them in order to do a fair comparison. I suppose that those features should be useful in a real production enviroment, am I right?What is you opinion? The only option I'm going to enable in the next benchmark update is the new enableClosureCompiler. I'm open to suggetions and criticism. Regards Il giorno mercoledì 6 febbraio 2013 10:21:46 UTC+1, Sachin Shekhar R ha scritto: I am not sure whether you turned on all GWT compiler arguments and some turn off some Dev specific GWT features. *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingtrue/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatatrue/disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilertrue/enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* - set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=strip / On Sunday, February 3, 2013 6:20:40 AM UTC+5:30, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Hi, I have wrote a simple benchmark suite in java and I have run with JavaSE 1.7.0 and, thanks to GWT, I have run the same code on Firefox,Chrome,MSIE and Opera. My results, with the experiment details are published here:http://thegoodcodeinn.blogspot.it/2013/02/gwt-benchmarks-gwtjsvm-vs-javavm.html You know, Javascript VM have highly improved recently but how good is GWT at compiling java into Javascript? And.. how efficient is the GWT compiled code+JsVM compared to Java bytecode running on a Java Virtual Machine?? I was just curious about. Hope you like this experiment, comments are appreciated. Have fun Fabiano PS: My benchmark is oriented to numeric, data crunching; no multimedia. I'll also release the benchmark code later.. if requested. I'm only a bit lazy at the moment. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT Benchmarks, Java Virtual Machine vs GWT+browser JsVM
Il giorno giovedì 7 febbraio 2013 16:14:32 UTC+1, Paul Stockley ha scritto: For sure we release production code with the following flags - disableCastCheckingtrue/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatatrue/disableClassMetadata Also you don't specify what version of IE you are testing with, I assume IE9 The graph leged doesn't specify, but I have pointed the IE version in the blog post, it is IE9 Why do tou disable for sure that option? Is it for perfromance? What is exactly sure in disablinng Cast checking? Regards On Thursday, February 7, 2013 10:10:54 AM UTC-5, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Hi, in fact I have not specied not used particular optimization arguments. I have not disabled CastChecking and ClassMetadata, and I have not explicitly set the optimization level (but the default is the maximum value). By using defaults my current configuration is: *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingfalse/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatafalse/disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilerfalse/enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=native / About the first two options, I dunno know If it is correct to disable them in order to do a fair comparison. I suppose that those features should be useful in a real production enviroment, am I right?What is you opinion? The only option I'm going to enable in the next benchmark update is the new enableClosureCompiler. I'm open to suggetions and criticism. Regards Il giorno mercoledì 6 febbraio 2013 10:21:46 UTC+1, Sachin Shekhar R ha scritto: I am not sure whether you turned on all GWT compiler arguments and some turn off some Dev specific GWT features. *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingtrue/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatatrue/disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilertrue/enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* - set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=strip / On Sunday, February 3, 2013 6:20:40 AM UTC+5:30, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Hi, I have wrote a simple benchmark suite in java and I have run with JavaSE 1.7.0 and, thanks to GWT, I have run the same code on Firefox,Chrome,MSIE and Opera. My results, with the experiment details are published here:http://thegoodcodeinn.blogspot.it/2013/02/gwt-benchmarks-gwtjsvm-vs-javavm.html You know, Javascript VM have highly improved recently but how good is GWT at compiling java into Javascript? And.. how efficient is the GWT compiled code+JsVM compared to Java bytecode running on a Java Virtual Machine?? I was just curious about. Hope you like this experiment, comments are appreciated. Have fun Fabiano PS: My benchmark is oriented to numeric, data crunching; no multimedia. I'll also release the benchmark code later.. if requested. I'm only a bit lazy at the moment. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: How to make EditTextCell fit the whole width of cellWidth?
Use CSS:
.myCellTable input[type=text], .myCellTable select {
width: 100%;
box-sizing: border-box;
-moz-box-sizing: border-box;
-webkit-box-sizing: border-box;
}
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: How to override the Template interface in EditTextCell?
Use CSS. On Wednesday, February 6, 2013 9:22:36 AM UTC-5, membersound wrote: Hi, I like the EditTextCell, but I want to override the template interface to give the text in the input field eg a different aligment. How can I override the interface Template when extending EditTextCell? If not possible, what could I do apart from copying the whole EditTextCell and modify to my needs? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT Benchmarks, Java Virtual Machine vs GWT+browser JsVM
JavaScript doesn't have a concept of type, so all type checks are really
just function calls. Both instanceof and casts need to be generated to have
JavaScript behave exactly like Java. Here's a quick demonstration:
public class Test implements EntryPoint {
public static class SomeObject {
}
public interface HasMethod {
void doSomething();
}
public static class Subclass extends SomeObject implements HasMethod {
@Override
public void doSomething() {
Window.alert(something);
}
}
public void onModuleLoad() {
//fool the compiler into thinking it could be either option
SomeObject obj = isTrue() ? new Subclass() : new SomeObject();
//test, execute
if (obj instanceof HasMethod) {
HasMethod hasMethod = (HasMethod) obj;
hasMethod.doSomething();
}
}
private native boolean isTrue() /*-{
return true;
}-*/;
}
Watching the compiler operate on this (add
-Dgwt.jjs.traceMethods=Test.onModuleLoad to the vm args) shows how it
writes out the onModuleLoad method normally - here's the final result:
function $onModuleLoad(){
var obj;
obj = new Test$Subclass;
if (instanceOf(obj, 5)) {
dynamicCast(obj, 5);
$wnd.alert('something');
}
}
This is kind of a special example, since it turns out that Subclass isn't
actually needed anymore once we get inside the loop - the compiler inlined
the method. Additionally, the JS part of the compiler noticed that isTrue
is always true, so it got rid of the other constructor invocation. But
since that ran after all of the Java optimization, it wasn't possible to
get rid of either the instanceof or the cast. Sorry for getting distracted
there, but I didn't want to let the trivial example make it look like the
compiler *can't* make optimization - isTrue() being native is a deliberate
attempt to make the compiler trip.
So what happens if we disable casts with -XdisableCastChecking?
function $onModuleLoad(){
var obj;
obj = true?new Test$Subclass:new Test$SomeObject;
instanceOf(obj, 5) alert('something');
}
Hrm, so while I wasn't expect that (can someone else weigh in? Why might
disabling casts kill off that pass of the JS static eval visitor?), the
change I was after was made - no more cast operation, and this simplified
the code enough to let the compiler inline the block. Okay, lets try again
with a bit more complexity, so that the cast might actually mean something.
Java:
public class Test implements EntryPoint {
public static class SomeObject {
}
public interface HasMethod {
void doSomething();
}
public static class Subclass extends SomeObject implements HasMethod {
private int value;
public Subclass() {
doSomething();
}
@Override
public void doSomething() {
value++;
Window.alert(value + + value);
}
}
public void onModuleLoad() {
//fool the compiler into thinking it could be either option
SomeObject obj = isTrue() ? new Subclass() : new SomeObject();
//test, execute
if (obj instanceof HasMethod) {
HasMethod hasMethod = (HasMethod) obj;
hasMethod.doSomething();
}
}
private native boolean isTrue() /*-{
return true;
}-*/;
}
Compiling as normal:
function $onModuleLoad(){
var hasMethod, obj;
obj = new Test$Subclass;
if (instanceOf(obj, 5)) {
hasMethod = dynamicCast(obj, 5);
++hasMethod.value;
alert($intern_22 + hasMethod.value);
}
}
The doSomething method has still been inlined, but now we're actually
interacting with it. In JavaScript, we don't need to actually perform this
check, since either it has that field (and method), or it doesn't. Once
again, with the cast left out:
function $onModuleLoad(){
var hasMethod, obj;
obj = new Test$Subclass;
if (instanceOf(obj, 5)) {
hasMethod = obj;
++hasMethod.value;
alert($intern_22 + hasMethod.value);
}
}
This time we're just seeing an assignment operation, no extra cast (and the
static eval step worked this time...?).
In many other cases where a developer casts something, they have some
reason to know that this will work correctly. Rarely (if ever!) is it valid
to have a ClassCastException be thrown in production code, so removing this
code brings down the compiled size by a small amount, and at runtime, the
fastest code is the code that doesn't exist.
The only purpose of dynamicCast (which itself calls instanceOf) is to
possibly throw an exception if it didn't match. So the question usually is,
Will your app throw a ClassCastException in production?, and remember too
that you'll often get an error anyway, usually a null pointer exception,
since a field or a method will be missing or misnamed in the JavaScript.
Subsequent debugging in Dev mode (or web mode without that flag) will
result in the real ClassCastException occurring then.
The option to disable class metadata is a little more simple - it drops the
strings that hold the package and the classname,
Re: GWT Benchmarks, Java Virtual Machine vs GWT+browser JsVM
One thing I will be interested to see is the effect of enableClosureCompiler=true. It does significantly reduce the JS file size in many cases. However, I have read people complaining that the resulting code was slower. On Thursday, February 7, 2013 10:53:21 AM UTC-5, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Il giorno giovedì 7 febbraio 2013 16:14:32 UTC+1, Paul Stockley ha scritto: For sure we release production code with the following flags - disableCastCheckingtrue/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatatrue/disableClassMetadata Also you don't specify what version of IE you are testing with, I assume IE9 The graph leged doesn't specify, but I have pointed the IE version in the blog post, it is IE9 Why do tou disable for sure that option? Is it for perfromance? What is exactly sure in disablinng Cast checking? Regards On Thursday, February 7, 2013 10:10:54 AM UTC-5, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Hi, in fact I have not specied not used particular optimization arguments. I have not disabled CastChecking and ClassMetadata, and I have not explicitly set the optimization level (but the default is the maximum value). By using defaults my current configuration is: *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingfalse/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatafalse/disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilerfalse/enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=native / About the first two options, I dunno know If it is correct to disable them in order to do a fair comparison. I suppose that those features should be useful in a real production enviroment, am I right?What is you opinion? The only option I'm going to enable in the next benchmark update is the new enableClosureCompiler. I'm open to suggetions and criticism. Regards Il giorno mercoledì 6 febbraio 2013 10:21:46 UTC+1, Sachin Shekhar R ha scritto: I am not sure whether you turned on all GWT compiler arguments and some turn off some Dev specific GWT features. *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingtrue/disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatatrue/disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilertrue/enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* - set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=strip / On Sunday, February 3, 2013 6:20:40 AM UTC+5:30, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Hi, I have wrote a simple benchmark suite in java and I have run with JavaSE 1.7.0 and, thanks to GWT, I have run the same code on Firefox,Chrome,MSIE and Opera. My results, with the experiment details are published here:http://thegoodcodeinn.blogspot.it/2013/02/gwt-benchmarks-gwtjsvm-vs-javavm.html You know, Javascript VM have highly improved recently but how good is GWT at compiling java into Javascript? And.. how efficient is the GWT compiled code+JsVM compared to Java bytecode running on a Java Virtual Machine?? I was just curious about. Hope you like this experiment, comments are appreciated. Have fun Fabiano PS: My benchmark is oriented to numeric, data crunching; no multimedia. I'll also release the benchmark code later.. if requested. I'm only a bit lazy at the moment. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
help with date parsing and time zones
I'm allowing the user to input a date and time and I'm using the pattern: DateTimeFormat format = DateTimeFormat.getFormat(-MM-dd HH:mm); However, the date is specified as UTC, so if a user were to put in: 2013-01-01 15:30 This will parse fine, but when printing out the parsed date is says (essentially): Jan 1st 2013 15:30 GMT-8 Where I would like this to be either: Jan 1st 2013 15:30 GMT Jan 1st 2013 7:30 GMT-8 I know the docs says: In the current implementation, timezone parsing only supports GMT:hhmm, GMT:+hhmm, and GMT:-hhmm. But I don't know what that means. Do I adjust my pattern to include this? Does the input time need to have GMT in it somewhere? Thanks! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT dev plugin for Chrome 21.0.1180.60 m not installing
First off, what a nightmare it is just to get the plugin working on chrome. the chrome store kept failing to install the plugin with a worthless error message. So i defaulted back to my old habit of opening the chrome extensions tab and then dragging the CRX file directly onto the browser. But that was failing now too due to a incorrect magic number error. I finally figured out i need to be logged into my google account in order to install the plugin directly from the google chrome store. Why doesn't the plugin install screen just say you must be logged in to install the plugin rather than the worthless message it does now?? On Tuesday, October 2, 2012 11:12:04 AM UTC-7, Chris Calabro wrote: that is bizarre. it did not work last night even with many attempts, but the exact same operation this morning worked! i didn't even restart chrome or anything. btw i'm using chrome Version 22.0.1229.64 beta. - chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT Benchmarks, Java Virtual Machine vs GWT+browser JsVM
I can definitely confirm that with the closure compiler enabled the compiled size drops on the few apps I've tried it on, on the order of 5-15% (no hard and fast numbers yet, working on such a writeup now). I can confirm both a performance and size improvement with turning off cast checking, but I ran those tests around two years ago, and was mostly targeting IE6/7/8 and around Firefox 3 or 3.6. On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Paul Stockley pstockl...@gmail.com wrote: One thing I will be interested to see is the effect of enableClosureCompiler=true. It does significantly reduce the JS file size in many cases. However, I have read people complaining that the resulting code was slower. On Thursday, February 7, 2013 10:53:21 AM UTC-5, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Il giorno giovedì 7 febbraio 2013 16:14:32 UTC+1, Paul Stockley ha scritto: For sure we release production code with the following flags - disableCastCheckingtrue/**disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatatrue/**disableClassMetadata Also you don't specify what version of IE you are testing with, I assume IE9 The graph leged doesn't specify, but I have pointed the IE version in the blog post, it is IE9 Why do tou disable for sure that option? Is it for perfromance? What is exactly sure in disablinng Cast checking? Regards On Thursday, February 7, 2013 10:10:54 AM UTC-5, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Hi, in fact I have not specied not used particular optimization arguments. I have not disabled CastChecking and ClassMetadata, and I have not explicitly set the optimization level (but the default is the maximum value). By using defaults my current configuration is: *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingfalse/**disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatafalse/**disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilerfalse/**enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/**optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=native / About the first two options, I dunno know If it is correct to disable them in order to do a fair comparison. I suppose that those features should be useful in a real production enviroment, am I right?What is you opinion? The only option I'm going to enable in the next benchmark update is the new enableClosureCompiler. I'm open to suggetions and criticism. Regards Il giorno mercoledì 6 febbraio 2013 10:21:46 UTC+1, Sachin Shekhar R ha scritto: I am not sure whether you turned on all GWT compiler arguments and some turn off some Dev specific GWT features. *GWT Compiler Arguments - * - disableCastCheckingtrue/**disableCastChecking - disableClassMetadatatrue/**disableClassMetadata - enableClosureCompilertrue/**enableClosureCompiler - optimizationLevel9/**optimizationLevel *GWT module options in .gwt.xml* - set-property name=compiler.stackMode value=strip / On Sunday, February 3, 2013 6:20:40 AM UTC+5:30, Fabiano Tarlao wrote: Hi, I have wrote a simple benchmark suite in java and I have run with JavaSE 1.7.0 and, thanks to GWT, I have run the same code on Firefox,Chrome,MSIE and Opera. My results, with the experiment details are published here:http://thegoodcodeinn. **blogspot.it/2013/02/gwt-**benchmarks-gwtjsvm-vs-javavm.**htmlhttp://thegoodcodeinn.blogspot.it/2013/02/gwt-benchmarks-gwtjsvm-vs-javavm.html You know, Javascript VM have highly improved recently but how good is GWT at compiling java into Javascript? And.. how efficient is the GWT compiled code+JsVM compared to Java bytecode running on a Java Virtual Machine?? I was just curious about. Hope you like this experiment, comments are appreciated. Have fun Fabiano PS: My benchmark is oriented to numeric, data crunching; no multimedia. I'll also release the benchmark code later.. if requested. I'm only a bit lazy at the moment. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- 218.248.6165 niloc...@gmail.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT RPC future ?
Hi, Another option is the Restlet edition for GWT: - https://github.com/restlet/restlet-framework-java/tree/master/modules also take a look at piriti (http://code.google.com/p/piriti/wiki/Comparison) Cheers Rob Kiahu.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: help with date parsing and time zones
OK, I got it working just as I wanted by appending the Z to both the pattern and the input date. So, doing this: DateTimeFormat format = DateTimeFormat.getFormat(-MM-dd HH:mm); And this: 2013-01-01 15:30Z Gets me this: Jan 1st 2013 7:30 GMT-8 Hope this helps someone else. On Thursday, February 7, 2013 2:24:29 PM UTC-8, rjcarr wrote: I'm allowing the user to input a date and time and I'm using the pattern: DateTimeFormat format = DateTimeFormat.getFormat(-MM-dd HH:mm); However, the date is specified as UTC, so if a user were to put in: 2013-01-01 15:30 This will parse fine, but when printing out the parsed date is says (essentially): Jan 1st 2013 15:30 GMT-8 Where I would like this to be either: Jan 1st 2013 15:30 GMT Jan 1st 2013 7:30 GMT-8 I know the docs says: In the current implementation, timezone parsing only supports GMT:hhmm, GMT:+hhmm, and GMT:-hhmm. But I don't know what that means. Do I adjust my pattern to include this? Does the input time need to have GMT in it somewhere? Thanks! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT Benchmarks, Java Virtual Machine vs GWT+browser JsVM
I have released the code and executables, it's not fully documented at the moment, and I'll definitively tune things in the next days, what to say.. I have used two standard benchmark codes sieve and GNU fft (little modifications), and I have assured JIT to compile all the code thanks to warmup, and I have generated sideffects from all the benchmark loops in order to avoid optimization from cutting them out. I have also tried to write cross-java/Javascript Regex expressions, but you know, this is for fun and time is lacking... so, if you find errors, fixes, or you have suggestions, please send me patches. Criticisms are welcome. Regards http://thegoodcodeinn.blogspot.it/2013/02/gwt-java-benchmarks-released.html http://code.google.com/p/gwt-java-benchmark/ Il giorno domenica 3 febbraio 2013 01:50:40 UTC+1, Fabiano Tarlao ha scritto: Hi, I have wrote a simple benchmark suite in java and I have run with JavaSE 1.7.0 and, thanks to GWT, I have run the same code on Firefox,Chrome,MSIE and Opera. My results, with the experiment details are published here:http://thegoodcodeinn.blogspot.it/2013/02/gwt-benchmarks-gwtjsvm-vs-javavm.html You know, Javascript VM have highly improved recently but how good is GWT at compiling java into Javascript? And.. how efficient is the GWT compiled code+JsVM compared to Java bytecode running on a Java Virtual Machine?? I was just curious about. Hope you like this experiment, comments are appreciated. Have fun Fabiano PS: My benchmark is oriented to numeric, data crunching; no multimedia. I'll also release the benchmark code later.. if requested. I'm only a bit lazy at the moment. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: GWT Benchmarks, Java Virtual Machine vs GWT+browser JsVM
Thanks Colin,
I think that make sense removing cast checks and metadata in production, I
have alway thought that getting cast errors in production is a good things,
but it looks marginal.
I think I'll add these optimizations in the next benchmarks.
Regards
Il giorno giovedì 7 febbraio 2013 21:36:20 UTC+1, Colin Alworth ha scritto:
JavaScript doesn't have a concept of type, so all type checks are really
just function calls. Both instanceof and casts need to be generated to have
JavaScript behave exactly like Java. Here's a quick demonstration:
public class Test implements EntryPoint {
public static class SomeObject {
}
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Trouble with UiBinder getting UiHandler events to fire under GWT 2.4
FYI, documentation is updated to emphasize that related code sample will not work with widgets. On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:44 AM, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:47:30 PM UTC+1, Nils Schröder wrote: Just for your notice: I had exactly the same Problem this way. Takes 2 hours to find this post -.- What do you think? Is there a possibility that some one update the Documentation? Just because of small, cute and new GWT Developers like me :D Feel free to file an issue on the tracker so we can at least track it. Eventually the documentation sources should be open-sourced as well so anyone could propose patches, but it won't happen any time soon I'm afraid. -- 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/-/XViZOjEufWAJ. 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. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Trouble with UiBinder getting UiHandler events to fire under GWT 2.4
Am Freitag, 8. Februar 2013 00:38:37 UTC+1 schrieb Goktug Gokdogan:
FYI, documentation is updated to emphasize that related code sample will
not work with widgets.
A bit more should be corrected. The simple Hello World class example is
IMHO terrible for starters.
public class HelloWorld {
interface MyUiBinder extends UiBinderDivElement, HelloWorld {}
private static MyUiBinder uiBinder = GWT.create(MyUiBinder.class);
@UiField SpanElement nameSpan;
public HelloWorld() {
setElement(uiBinder.createAndBindUi(this));
}
public void setName(String name) { nameSpan.setInnerText(name); }
public void Element getElement() { return nameSpan; }
}
HelloWorld helloWorld = new HelloWorld();
// Don't forget, this is DOM only; will not work with GWT widgets
Document.get().getBody().appendChild(helloWorld.getElement());
helloWorld.setName(World);
First, HelloWorld has no super class but uses the (undefined) method
setElement() in its constructor. Second, getElement() returns the nameSpan
variable and is used in the second code example to append the Hello World
UiBinder to the body element. A starter sees code that does not compile and
if he assumes that setElement() is maybe the corresponding setter for
getElement() { return nameSpan; } then its totally wrong because nameSpan
is already assigned via @UiField.
To make things clear getElement() should return the DivElement returned by
createAndBindUi() *or* HelloWorld should extend UiObject and have its
getElement() { return nameSpan; } method removed.
-- J.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
DataGrid vertical scrollbar overlaps the last column
Hi all, I am facing a DataGrid horizontal/Vetricle Scrollbar overlaps the last row issue. While displaying the data grid, It overlaps the last row as well as column. Attached is the screen shot. This issue is not specific to IE8. You can reproduce it any browser. For vertical scroll bar, even if I add some padding or make the last column wider , the issue is still persist. Please suggest workaround to sort out this. Thanks in advance. Kedar -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Google Web Toolkit group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. attachment: scrollIssue.PNG
