Best practice to serialize a org.w3c.dom.Document over RPC?
Hi guys, A (hopefully easy) question: what is the GWT 'best practice' to take a server-side DOM built with org.w3c.dom.Document and pass it over RPC? Clearly once on the client-side it needs to become a com.google.gwt.xml.client.Document, and I can achieve this by serializing to and from a String of XML, but is there a better way? Something more performant that uses some built-in DOM serialization capabilities? Regards, Richard. -- 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-tool...@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.
Re: Best practice to serialize a org.w3c.dom.Document over RPC?
Perfect! Thanks for the detailed and fast responses guys. Richard. -- 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-tool...@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.
Re: Metawidget, who has used metawidget
Sergio, Thanks for your interest in Metawidget! Metawidget is currently at v0.95, so it is not quite yet mature. However it has already been used in several production GWT projects and has decent documentation, examples, and test coverage. If you get chance to give it a try, I'd be happy to help you work through any issues you may encounter. Metawidget is a purely *runtime* UI generator, so it is not like code generation (which is static), nor quite like scaffolding (which is runtime, but if you want to change anything you have to generate it statically). Regards, Richard. P.S. The project URL actually *is* http://metawidget.org, it just redirects to http://metawidget.sourceforge.net. But in case one day I want to change repository providers I don't want to hardcode sourceforge.net into all the links :) On Jun 4, 12:18 am, Sergio A. Campos Valdés chec...@gmail.com wrote: Excuse me. The project url is metawidget.sourceforge.net, it's not metawidget.org 2010/6/3 Chech0x - Segio Campos V. chec...@gmail.com who has used metawidget (metawidget.org) with GWT and Spring javabeans facade? is it mature? does it work like scaffolding or codegeneration? -- Deseando que Dios le bendiga se despide: Sergio Andrés Campos Valdés Ingeniero Informático. Perfil LinkedIn:http://cl.linkedin.com/in/scamposv Twitter: chech0x -- 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-tool...@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.
'Best practice' for unit testing servlets with init-params?
Hi guys, When unit testing a GWT app that uses servlets, it seems you cannot use the 'real' servlet definition in your app's web.xml. Instead you must put a 'servlet' element into your unit test's module.gwt.xml. However, the module.gwt.xml 'servlet' element is not as capable as the web.xml 'servlet' element. Specifically, it does not support init- params. So what is the 'best practice' for simulating my app's init-params? Is there a way in module.gwt.xml? Or is there a way in my servlet to detect I am running as a GWT unit test? Should I subclass my servlet to make a test version? Regards, Richard. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Hack my hack: how do I migrate FocusWidget::fireClickListeners to 1.6?
Hi guys,
In GWT 1.5 and earlier, I have been unit testing my click handlers as
explained on my blog here...
http://kennardconsulting.blogspot.com/2008/05/firing-onclicklisteners-in-gwt-unit.html
...this little hack no longer works in 1.6, because
FocusWidget::fireClickListeners is gone - replaced by (I assume)
FocusWidget::fireEvent. So my hack would become...
native void fireEvent( FocusWidget focusWidget, GwtEvent? event )
/*-{
focuswidg...@com.google.gwt.user.client.ui.focuswidget::fireEvent
(Lcom/google/gwt/event/shared/GwtEvent;)( event );
}-*/;
The problem is I can't instantiate a ClickEvent so I'm stuck how to
call this. Is there a better way to unit test click handlers in 1.6?
Regards,
Richard.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Does TypeOracle.getType support parameterized types?
Hi guys, Is TypeOracle.getType, which the JavaDoc says 'finds a type given its fully qualified name', meant to work with parameterized qualified names? I've got a Generator that does... typeOracle.getType( myType.getQualifiedSourceName() ) ...and it works fine, but when I change it to... typeOracle.getType( myType.getParameterizedQualifiedSourceName() ) ...which in my case is more accurate, I get zero results. Is this not implemented? Is it meant to be? Thanks, Richard. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Using JavaScript 'var s in obj' on a GWT object
Jason, Reinier, Oh, okay. Wow. It works completely fine in hosted mode, but crashes and burns in production mode. I guess I'll need to go back to using generators. Thank you both for your time, and for the heads up. Regards, Richard. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Using JavaScript 'var s in obj' on a GWT object
Reinier, Thanks for your quick response. I'm a bit confused, though. If... GWT compresses the java identifier of any method or field down to a very short random collection of symbols ...then how come I can still do... o...@org.foo.foo::myMethod()(); ...and even... alert( obj[ '@org.foo.Foo::myMethod()' ] ); ...is there some kind of one-way mapping going on? Regards, Richard. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Using JavaScript 'var s in obj' on a GWT object
Dear All,
First, thanks for all your hard work on GWT. It really is a fantastic
framework!
Is there a reason why GWT-compiled JavaScript objects are not
'reflectable' like regular JavaScript objects are? When I do (in JSNI
JavaScript):
for( var s in obj )
{
alert( obj[s] );
}
I don't see any properties or actions for GWT-compiled objects, but I
do for regular JavaScript objects. I don't much understand the 'var s
in obj' technique, but it seems it should be able to reflect GWT
objects? For example, when I do...
alert( obj[ '@org.foo.Foo::myMethod()' ] );
...then I CAN reflect the method okay?
Regards,
Richard.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Why are GWT JavaScript objects not enumerable?
Dear All,
First, thanks for all your hard work on GWT. It really is a fantastic
framework!
Is there a reason why GWT-compiled JavaScript objects are not
'reflectable' like regular JavaScript objects are? When I do (in
JavaScript):
for( var s in obj )
{
alert( obj[s] );
}
I don't see any properties or actions for GWT-compiled objects, but I
do for regular JavaScript objects. I don't much understand the 'var s
in obj' technique, but it seems it should be able to reflect GWT
objects? For example, when I do...
alert( obj[ '@org.foo.Foo::myMethod()' ] );
...then I CAN reflect the method okay?
Regards,
Richard.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
