Re: [gwt-contrib] Removing GWT sample apps from gwt.google.com/samples/?
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Matthew Dempsky mdemp...@google.comwrote: Currently, gwt.google.com/samples/ hosts a bunch of sample apps linked from http://www.gwtproject.org/examples.html. However, it's kind of a pain for us to continue maintaining the custom server that hosts these apps, so we'd like to either move them elsewhere (e.g., App Engine) or just remove them completely. Any thoughts/recommendations on how to proceed? There's actually quite a few more sample apps hosted than the three linked above (e.g., http://gwt.google.com/samples/Hello/Hello.html), but I suspect Showcase, DynaTable, and Mail are the only ones people actually know about / visit. It seems like ideally we create an App Engine app that hosts those three sample apps (or worst case create three App Engine apps, one for each), and then I can map them to samples.gwtproject.org or wherever. They were on GAE at one point -- I don't remember why they were moved though. We definitely need to keep Showcase up and running, but I don't care so much about the rest. -- John A. Tamplin -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups GWT Contributors group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: [gwt-contrib] Google team meeting notes for August 7 (and earlier)
Hi John, Thanks for the great responses. do you still have to retranslate the *entire* AST to Javascript source (and is the resulting process still fast if you have to do so)? Yeah, good question...seems like in an ideal world you could cache the JS string for each compilation unit and then stream them to the target .js file on disk. I know that's not at all how GWT works today. The approach i'm working on is to make change normal compiles to be incremental at the per module level. This should transparently speed up not just build systems, but also SuperDev mode. That is a good point. In a nutshell my approach (leaving out lots and lots of edge cases) is this: run the GWT compiler on Module A with *just* the Java source for Module A and the bytecode for its dependencies provided to the JDT compiler. [snip] That sounds similar to what I was thinking (although much more flushed out instead of random arm chair musing), except done on the module level instead of the compilation unit level. I get what you're saying, that if done with modules, you could output gwtar v2 files :-), and speed both dev/prod mode up. ...well, and I'd wanted to pass in an GWT AST instead of Java source, because I think you could very quickly get a GWT (Java) AST from the Eclipse Java AST, so could skip the JDT step of the compilation process. Sounds pretty awesome. - Stephen -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups GWT Contributors group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
