Re: [gwt-contrib] Elemental2 and JsInterop base beta releases available.

[James Horsley]

Wonderful news. Thanks!

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 2:47 AM David Yu  wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 5:42 AM, 'Julien Dramaix' via GWT Contributors <
> google-web-toolkit-contributors@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> The beta version of Elemental2 using the JsInterop specification has been
> released on Sonatype today and is available on Maven central.
>
> Better late than never I guess :-)
>
>
> This release introduces the concept of union types (which are heavily used
> in JavaScript) and many more improvements. More information about union
> types can be found in this document
> 
> .
>
>
> We also split Elemental into smaller jar files:
>
>
> Jar file
>
> artifact-id
>
> GWT module
>
> elemental2-core.jar
> 
>
> elemental2-core
>
> elemental2.core.Core
>
> elemental2-promise.jar
> 
>
> elemental2-promise
>
> elemental2.promise.Promise
>
> elemental2-dom.jar
> 
>
> elemental2-dom
>
> elemental2.dom.Dom
>
> elemental2-svg.jar
> 
>
> elemental2-svg
>
> elemental2.svg.Svg
>
> elemental2-webgl.jar
> 
>
> elemental2-webgl
>
> elemental2.webgl.WebGl
>
> elemental2-media.jar
> 
>
> elemental2-media
>
> elemental2.media.Media
>
> elemental2-indexeddb.jar
> 
>
> elemental2-indexeddb
>
> elemental2.indexeddb.IndexedDb
>
> elemental2-webstorage.jar
> 
>
> elemental2-webstorage
>
> elemental2.webstorage.WebStorage
>
>
>
> You can try them by downloading the jar files or adding Maven dependencies:
>
>
> 
>
>  com.google.elemental2
>
>  ${artifact-id}
>
>  1.0.0-beta-1
>
> 
>
>
> Then inherit the right gwt module in your gwt.xml file.
>
>
> This beta version works only with the latest HEAD_SNAPSHOT release of GWT
> 
> .
>
>
> We’ve also released a beta version of JsInterop.base. This library
> contains base classes and utilities that provide access to JavaScript
> language constructs that are not available in pure Java.
>
>
> You can try it by downloading the jar file
> 
> or use the following Maven dependency:
>
>
> 
>
>  com.google.jsinterop
>
>  base
>
>  1.0.0-beta-1
>
> 
>
>
> Don’t hesitate to report any bugs, issues, concerns you have on this
> mailing list.
>
>
> Important note: They are beta releases and future updates (up until the
> final release) may break code!
>
>
> -Julien
>
>
> --
>
> Julien Dramaix |  Software Engineer |  dram...@google.com |  650-750-6053
> <(650)%20750-6053>
>
> --
> 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.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CABXeq2QsTarhDKbYmz0y1SOrjpuFNdoNmAnvAYKacO1f4rLcLg%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>
>
> --
> When the cat is away, the mouse is alone.
> - David Yu
>
> --
> 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.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAOkdovKQn1wo%2BR2jrZ3iGrh4ko199_bt6%3DUC-Xd_HYUc%2B65-Yw%40mail.gmail.com
> 

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Experimental release of Elemental2

[James Horsley]

Sounds great. Thanks!

On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:27 PM Julien Dramaix 
wrote:

> elemental2 is generated from closure extern files.
>
> The open source version of the generator should have a support for
> converting d.ts file to java. We don't know yet when the generator will be
> open sourced.
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 4:12 PM James Horsley 
> wrote:
>
>> I remember hearing that elemental2 was being generated from TypeScript
>> definitions. If that's true, is there any chance we could get a look at the
>> generator code too?
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, June 30, 2016 at 1:23:51 AM UTC+1, Julien Dramaix wrote:
>>>
>>> A new experimental version of Elemental2 using the new JsInterop
>>> specification has been pushed on Sonatype today.
>>>
>>> You can try it by downloading the jar file
>>> <https://oss.sonatype.org/service/local/repositories/google-releases/content/com/google/gwt/elemental2-experimental/16-06-30/elemental2-experimental-16-06-30.jar>
>>> or adding this following maven dependency:
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>  com.google.gwt
>>>
>>>  elemental2-experimental
>>>
>>>  16-06-30
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> Then, inherits the elemental2 module:
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> This experimental version works only with the last 2.8-snapshot release
>>> of GWT.
>>>
>>> The goal of this release is to get feedback so don’t hesitate to report
>>> any bugs, issues, concerns you have on this mailing list.
>>>
>>>
>>> Important note: This is an experimental release and without doubt the
>>> future updates until the final release are going to break code!
>>>
>>> - Julien
>>>
>>> --
>> 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.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/cd662014-000e-4823-8eab-0acb469c574c%40googlegroups.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/cd662014-000e-4823-8eab-0acb469c574c%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
> --
> 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.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CABb_3%3D6y-xP%3DUU-LzPBXj68KPycBT6hdep%3DFehbh8QbPvb_vJQ%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CABb_3%3D6y-xP%3DUU-LzPBXj68KPycBT6hdep%3DFehbh8QbPvb_vJQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAHUxr6PHZWmBfW3n73d2qadVRBWdWBTRiUv557ucvQA-KooOCQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[gwt-contrib] Re: Experimental release of Elemental2

[James Horsley]

I remember hearing that elemental2 was being generated from TypeScript 
definitions. If that's true, is there any chance we could get a look at the 
generator code too?

On Thursday, June 30, 2016 at 1:23:51 AM UTC+1, Julien Dramaix wrote:
>
> A new experimental version of Elemental2 using the new JsInterop 
> specification has been pushed on Sonatype today.
>
> You can try it by downloading the jar file 
> 
>  
> or adding this following maven dependency:
>
> 
>
>  com.google.gwt
>
>  elemental2-experimental
>
>  16-06-30
>
> 
>
> Then, inherits the elemental2 module:
>
> 
>
> This experimental version works only with the last 2.8-snapshot release of 
> GWT.
>
> The goal of this release is to get feedback so don’t hesitate to report 
> any bugs, issues, concerns you have on this mailing list.
>
>
> Important note: This is an experimental release and without doubt the 
> future updates until the final release are going to break code!  
>
> - Julien
>
>

-- 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/cd662014-000e-4823-8eab-0acb469c574c%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [gwt-contrib] Experimental release of Elemental2

[James Horsley]

This is brilliant. Thanks for sharing the experimental version!!!

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 1:23 AM 'Julien Dramaix' via GWT Contributors <
google-web-toolkit-contributors@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> A new experimental version of Elemental2 using the new JsInterop
> specification has been pushed on Sonatype today.
>
> You can try it by downloading the jar file
> 
> or adding this following maven dependency:
>
> 
>
>  com.google.gwt
>
>  elemental2-experimental
>
>  16-06-30
>
> 
>
> Then, inherits the elemental2 module:
>
> 
>
> This experimental version works only with the last 2.8-snapshot release of
> GWT.
>
> The goal of this release is to get feedback so don’t hesitate to report
> any bugs, issues, concerns you have on this mailing list.
>
>
> Important note: This is an experimental release and without doubt the
> future updates until the final release are going to break code!
>
> - Julien
>
> --
> 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.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CABXeq2Q%3DuH8beWj4tiG28tycASsJxK8mnxxNPZnEykUeTcMWXw%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAHUxr6N%3DJXOqePECVsoua8gOr72%3DUSg-1FFHhXcTuY23UOHYQg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Trying to use JsInterop to work with React

[James Horsley]

Paul, brilliant news. Look forward to hopefully taking a look at your code
if you're able to share.

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:15 PM Paul Stockley  wrote:

> Success! With some javascript hacking I have managed to get it working. I
> can access state and props and set state as a result of an onClick event. I
> think it might be possible to get react fully working. Below is my somewhat
> contrived solution
>
>
> --
> 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.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/2af4ca30-e14c-477f-aad4-b3d4b2d7a27b%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAHUxr6MpTpHxFEwaNACjZKa-2E5kEB2CKOVb-7cLjwXE3nd3Lg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [gwt-contrib] Trying to use JsInterop to work with React

[James Horsley]

Paul, any chance you're thinking of releasing your code on github or
something? I think an open sourced ReactJs-GWT jsinterop wrapper would be
something a number of people might be interested in using and contributing
to.

On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 9:45 PM Paul Stockley  wrote:

> I did think about the ES6 class approach. However, The createElement
> method would need to take the class as a parameter (not an instance). How
> would I do that?
>
>
>
> On Sunday, March 13, 2016 at 5:32:19 PM UTC-4, Goktug Gokdogan wrote:
>
>> See examples on how ES6 classes work with React. Those examples should
>> apply to @JsTypes as well.
>>
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 2:12 PM, Colin Alworth  wrote:
>>
> Yikes, that's rather opinionated. I don't personally work with React, but
>>> I guess I'm surprised that it can't handle actual inheritance (or even
>>> defining a prototype and attaching it to a constructor).
>>>
>>> Based on what you have there and the details described at
>>> https://facebook.github.io/react/docs/top-level-api.html, I'd suspect
>>> that they actually want the equivalent of the class object itself, not an
>>> instance of it (the line between them is blury in JS already).
>>>
>>> > One thing that makes components different than standard prototypal
>>> classes is that you don't need to call new on them. They are convenience
>>> wrappers that construct backing instances (via new) for you.
>>>
>>> This seems to imply that you can't be guaranteed that your constructors
>>> will actually be called, but also reinforces the idea that they don't want
>>> you to pass in a class instance, just the methods that should be called on
>>> the eventually-created instances. More details from
>>> https://facebook.github.io/react/docs/component-specs.html seem to say
>>> that you are actually expected to pass in just a bag of properties, one of
>>> which will be that `render` function, which can trust that a `this` will be
>>> specified to provide `props` and `state`.
>>>
>>> If there is a hook that lets you define your own constructor or factory
>>> method, that would be good to have to correctly do the GWT object wiring
>>> (perhaps some jsinterop expert can pipe up here as to what will be lost
>>> without that being called). Otherwise, some jsni or JsObject-building code
>>> that copies references to functions over to the a map-like object would be
>>> ideal. A JsProperty-annotated field may be enough to convince the compiler
>>> to generate correct code inside your function to access those properties,
>>> but I would be less sure about non-static helper methods still being around
>>> in the generated component.
>>>
>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 3:35 PM Paul Stockley 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 We have started using React (using ES6 and FlowTypes) which is quite
 nice. However, we have a large GWT application that we want to start
 embedding React within. This makes perfect sense for migrating away from
 Widgets to a more modern approach. So I decided I would try and define a
 Java Api for React. After a couple of hours I got a really hacky prototype
 basically working. The code looks like

 private ClassicComponentClass customComponent;


 public void onModuleLoad() {

 customComponent = React.createClass(new CustomComponent());

 HTMLProps props = Props.newHTML();
 props.setDefaultValue("Test");

 DOMElement div =
 React.createElement("div", props,
 React.createElement("div", null),
 React.createElement(customComponent, null),
 React.createElement("div", null, "An example")
 );

 ReactDOM.render(div, Document.get().getElementById("mainCont"));
 }


 @JsType(namespace = JsPackage.GLOBAL, name="CustomComponent")
 public class CustomComponent {

 @JsMethod
 public ReactElement render() {
 return React.createElement("div", null, "It works");
 }
 }



 This works fine for intrinsic React components. The problem is defining 
 custom components. The React.createClass function needs to take a plain 
 javascript object with certain methods defined (render, lifecyle methods 
 etc). If I pass a Java object marked as JsType, this doesn't work because 
 the render method needs to be defined on the top level object. The code 
 puts it on a different prototype which doesn't work because React does the 
 following:



   for (var name in spec) {
 if (!spec.hasOwnProperty(name)) {  --Isn't true for render
   continue;
 }


 Is there some way to achieve what I want with JsInterop?  I tried 
 extending another base class marked with isNative=true. However, this 
 results in a runtime error when trying to construct an object of that type.


 I am going to try a real hack with a JSNI method t

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Elemental 2?

[James Horsley]

When both Elemental2 and JsInterop are released I think that the community
will start to innovate on this front and new libraries will pop up on
github to address these needs; "if you build it, they will come" and all
that.

I know I'm very much looking forward to Elemental2 + Jsinterop as a
platform to build on.

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 6:45 AM 'Ray Cromwell' via GWT Contributors <
google-web-toolkit-contributors@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> There could be a separate Json library build with JsInterop. Some of the
> decisions I made in the design of the original Elemental JSON were made
> specifically because of DevMode support and GWT optimization internals.
> Given the unboxing of Double and Boolean, and the elimination of DevMode,
> the library can be much simpler now and still have a JVM implementation to
> be portable.
>
> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 10:28 PM, 'Goktug Gokdogan' via GWT Contributors <
> google-web-toolkit-contributors@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
>> Elemental2 will be just an auto-generated thin wrapper around the browser
>> APIs. Unlike Elemental1, it will not provide a cross platform JSON
>> implementation.
>>
>> I don't think you need to report compatibility bugs for Elemental1 unless
>> a maintainer steps up and shows interest.
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Erik Kuefler  wrote:
>>
>>> What's the current thinking regarding JSON in Elemental 2? That part has
>>> always been a bit different from the DOM libraries, and I know there was
>>> talk a long time back about splitting it out. I've been using Elemental
>>> JSON extensively in my projects just to have a JSON library that works in
>>> GWT and in JVM, but I've found it to be extremely buggy (mostly in terms of
>>> behavior differences between jvm, optimized gwt, and draft mode gwt). Are
>>> these bugs worth reporting? Is it all being reworked for Elemental 2?
>>>
>>> On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 12:36:22 PM UTC-8, Ray Cromwell wrote:

 Another thing to consider is that J2CL was developed as a 'bake off',
 in which multiple prototypes and designs were discussed/looked at (compile
 from Java with JDT, compile from bytecode, compile using Javac APIs,
 writing parser by hand, etc) It would have been a bit premature to release
 any of them as they were all known ahead of time to be throwaways.

 I have a hacky Elemental2 prototype (which is not the official one that
 Julien is working on), if you want to take it and play around.



 On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:30 AM, 'Goktug Gokdogan' via GWT
 Contributors  wrote:

> No worries :)
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Stephen Haberman <
> stephen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Goktug,
>>
>> That's all true, thanks for providing a counter data point. You're
>> right, the JsInterop design docs/etc. were all out in the open from day 
>> 1,
>> which I thought was pretty exiting.
>>
>> I definitely can't take any credit for providing useful feedback, but
>> I enjoyed seeing the thoughts and process from the community.
>>
>> So, apologies for the sweeping statement.
>>
>> - Stephen
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 11:58 AM, 'Goktug Gokdogan' via GWT
>> Contributors 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Singular is not a Google project and not being developed internally.
>>> It is Daniel's personal project and as fas as I know it is already in 
>>> the
>>> open source.
>>>
>>> We don't have anything to share for Elemental yet. We are talking
>>> with other teams, thinking about alternatives etc. Also when we 
>>> release, it
>>> will not be part of GWT-SDK so there is going be extra work to move the
>>> development outside; which doesn't make sense at this stage.
>>>
>>> The big things we recently developed for GWT, JsInterop and
>>> SuperDevMode and they were all open source from day one.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 5:34 AM, Stephen Haberman <
>>> stephen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 > Meanwhile I will revive my own generator project.

 I'll take the opportunity to hop on a soapbox, but the "closed
 source/eventually open source" model is a curious trend that I think 
 I've
 only seen in the GWT community (are their other examples?)...

 Musing, it probably stems from Google setting the example with GWT
 itself, where historically a lot happened internally before being 
 mirrored
 externally, but it happens a bit for non-Google-GWT projects as well, 
 like
 the repackaging of GPE, which was closed during initial development
 (although the result is great, and I really appreciate it), Singular, 
 which
 is still closed during initial development, now Elemental2. I
 dunno, I find it curious.

 E.g. with Singular, it's like it's bein

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Elemental 2?

[James Horsley]

Makes sense, just thought I'd check. Will look forward to hearing more
about it in the coming months.

Thanks!

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:05 AM Julien Dramaix  wrote:

> It's a bit too early to answer to this question with absolute certainty
> but I don't think I can guarantee the full backward compatibility with the
> first version of elemental.
>
>
> On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 10:50:26 AM UTC+1, James Horsley wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the update Julien. Do you know if Elemental2 will be at all
>> backwards compatible with Elemental1? I was trying to decide on whether to
>> use the Elemental1 interfaces for something I'm working on.
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 9:32 AM 'Julien Dramaix' via GWT Contributors <
>> google-web-toolkit-contributors@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>>
> Yes I'm currently working on Elemental2 and other intersting stuffs around
>>> JsInterop. It's a bit to early to communicate something right now. But you
>>> can expect to have more news in one or two months.
>>>
>>> Julien
>>>
>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 7:04 PM Goktug Gokdogan 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>> We have been actively working on a JsInterop generator and Elemental 2.0
>>>> in the last month or so.
>>>> We will make a separate Elemental release and yes that will be J2CL
>>>> ready.
>>>> However I don't expect it to be released before the next quarter. Also
>>>> having other tools that are investigating the same problem and coming with
>>>> its own solutions usually helps us to learn new stuff.
>>>>
>>>> (adding dramaix@, as he is the one who is actively working on this and
>>>> might provide some feedback as well)
>>>>
>>>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:35 AM, Bademus l.  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> Excellent question!
>>>>> Please let me put my 2cents:
>>>>> I'm interested in Chrome Extension API for GWT, it also can be easily
>>>>> generated from Chrome's IDL.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 10:39:20 AM UTC+1, Rene Hangstrup
>>>>> Møller wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A year ago I tried to write a tool for generating JsInterop classes
>>>>>> from WebIDL, I abandoned the project because there was no good solution 
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> method overloading and constructors back then. I know others have 
>>>>>> attempted
>>>>>> the same.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It looks like the new JsInterop spec solves those problems, so i was
>>>>>> considering reviving that project, but I don't want to waste the time if
>>>>>> Elemental 2 is going to be released within the next couple of months.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I guess it should be possible to release it as a separate project
>>>>>> that can be used from GWT 2.8 and the in the far future J2CL.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any chance that Elemental 2 will be available shortly or should I
>>>>>> build my own?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>> Rene
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>> 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.
>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/9d50d507-f79a-4596-a259-a14213f37875%40googlegroups.com
>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/9d50d507-f79a-4596-a259-a14213f37875%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>> 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
>>> .
>&g

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Elemental 2?

[James Horsley]

Thanks for the update Julien. Do you know if Elemental2 will be at all
backwards compatible with Elemental1? I was trying to decide on whether to
use the Elemental1 interfaces for something I'm working on.

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 9:32 AM 'Julien Dramaix' via GWT Contributors <
google-web-toolkit-contributors@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> Yes I'm currently working on Elemental2 and other intersting stuffs around
> JsInterop. It's a bit to early to communicate something right now. But you
> can expect to have more news in one or two months.
>
> Julien
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 7:04 PM Goktug Gokdogan  wrote:
>
>> We have been actively working on a JsInterop generator and Elemental 2.0
>> in the last month or so.
>> We will make a separate Elemental release and yes that will be J2CL ready.
>> However I don't expect it to be released before the next quarter. Also
>> having other tools that are investigating the same problem and coming with
>> its own solutions usually helps us to learn new stuff.
>>
>> (adding dramaix@, as he is the one who is actively working on this and
>> might provide some feedback as well)
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:35 AM, Bademus l.  wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>> Excellent question!
>>> Please let me put my 2cents:
>>> I'm interested in Chrome Extension API for GWT, it also can be easily
>>> generated from Chrome's IDL.
>>>
>>> On Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 10:39:20 AM UTC+1, Rene Hangstrup
>>> Møller wrote:

 Hi

 A year ago I tried to write a tool for generating JsInterop classes
 from WebIDL, I abandoned the project because there was no good solution for
 method overloading and constructors back then. I know others have attempted
 the same.

 It looks like the new JsInterop spec solves those problems, so i was
 considering reviving that project, but I don't want to waste the time if
 Elemental 2 is going to be released within the next couple of months.

 I guess it should be possible to release it as a separate project that
 can be used from GWT 2.8 and the in the far future J2CL.

 Any chance that Elemental 2 will be available shortly or should I build
 my own?

 Best regards
 Rene

 --
>>> 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
>>> .
>>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/9d50d507-f79a-4596-a259-a14213f37875%40googlegroups.com
>>> 
>>> .
>>>
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>> --
> 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.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CABXeq2Qe46G2ZcJHvSwMRnsWd4Ycw3fFf5R2OV6x9HcgNHQ5ZQ%40mail.gmail.com
> 
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAHUxr6NeLtWamPWeaJkHn6q8MjM0wgrjqvoBghQ_W7hbbGj%2B8g%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: [GWT2.8] RequestFactory lambda support

[James Horsley]

Love the idea of more lambda friendly RF methods but completely agree with
Jens on the Promise/CompletableFuture approach being preferable.

On 15 September 2015 at 15:30, Jens  wrote:

> I am pretty sure APIs will be enhanced for better lambda use over time but
> that will probably happen after a 2.8 release.
>
> Given your concrete example it might be cleaner to let fire() return an
> object that you can use to register callbacks on, similar to a Promise /
> CompletableFuture. That avoids having lots of overloads of the fire()
> method with all kinds of parameter combinations.
>
> IMHO readability also improves with such an object because it communicates
> pretty clearly which request state maps to which lambda, e.g.
> updatingPerson.*onSuccess*(), updatingPerson.
> *onConstraintViolation*(). Also you can pass around that instance
> which can be beneficial and, if supported, possibly attach N callbacks to
> one request state.
>
>
> -- J.
>
> --
> 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.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/4d40216a-204e-4e77-83a1-d8a00e539eea%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAHUxr6M_iVZdwsxVc1OffrTnhPpYJg-eW12CiuZ1sykkDu8%2B1Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[gwt-contrib] Re: Steering Committee Meeting Notes (8/19)

[James Horsley]

Thanks!

On 21 August 2015 at 17:48, 'Bhaskar Janakiraman' via GWT Steering <
gwt-steer...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

> See:
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/14HaNSGd8-_1VOAQIKWGd4lKmcRQLciL2ISPhE18yOQ4/edit?usp=sharing
>
> Bhaskar
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "GWT Steering" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to gwt-steering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAHUxr6M-oA1y9S%2Bw1nbHFTvqyjqddtNc6-UqhrSe7TOrrFJSEg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Stop calling it GWT 3.0

[James Horsley]

Thanks Daniel.

It's great that the steering committee are discussing the topic this early 
in the process; in particular, in the context of how GWT dev's can help 
themselves to be future proof (e.g. your Modernizing GWT talk).

I completely understand how certain GWT generator based libraries that 
require global knowledge don't fit with APT (e.g. GWT-RPC maybe needing the 
transportable types explicitly listed). But, at a glance, it seems like 
other high adoption libraries like UiBinder and the widget library (maybe 
even just some top level pieces?) can be retrofitted and released as 
separate projects to work with the transpiler. 

Hopefully we can leverage the opinions and contributions of the GWT 
community to determine what are "essential" libraries to carry forward and 
implement plans to make this happen. A few big helping points here would be:

1) Clearly documented ways to future proof new development. What to use, 
what to avoid, examples, etc.
2) Early access to the transpiler when you have a basic API settled, so 
that we can start working on converting our favourite libraries that the 
steering committee don't have time for.
3) Access to Singular. This gives people a future proof view layer to work 
with and I think it will boost confidence/morale for those concerned about 
the 3.0 transition.

Cheers,
James

On Sunday, June 14, 2015 at 8:02:11 PM UTC+1, Daniel Kurka wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> thanks for sharing your views in this discussion.
>
> Let me add a little background:
>
> Currently we the GWT team have decided to work on a new fast transpiler 
> from Java to Closure (our internal enhanced version of JavaScript). This 
> makes sense for a lot of reasons that I won't go into detail on, but here 
> are a few:
>
> - Our cross platform applications really want a faster and better 
> integration with closure.
> - GWT and closure share a lot of work (optimizations) and this is a good 
> way to not reinvent the wheel constantly
>
> So at some point we will open source this new compiler which will have 
> some compatibility with the old compiler, but it will not support 
> everything that GWT used to support.
> It is not up to Google to decide if this should be GWT 3.0, but it is up 
> to the steering committee to decide (this is what the steering committee is 
> for).
> However this new compiler works out, Google has tons of GWT applications 
> that would need to move from GWT 2.8 to whatever this new effort is, so 
> coming up with a common feature set and a migration plan is on our work 
> list, but we will focus on that once we actually have a new compiler.
>
> However we already know that applications that only use a certain feature 
> set (which might grow, as people put in more work), should be fine on both 
> compilers (we should discuss this after the 2.8 release). We only talked 
> about this so early in the process to give the community the ability to 
> provide feedback on our efforts, but don't panic, nothing is set in stone 
> and we (the steering committee) need your input on this.
>
> -Daniel
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 4:51 PM Alain Ekambi  > wrote:
>
>> Also think of people who use GWT for non web based project. 
>> We use GWT  for example to create native mobile apps with Titanium. And 
>> our customers love the  UI Binder support.
>>
>> Dropping UI Binder means we wont be able to support new version of GWT. 
>>
>> Such a bad move.
>>
>> On 14 June 2015 at 16:22, Travis Schmidt > > wrote:
>>
>>> I have the same concerns as the last comment.  We are a java shop and 
>>> use enterprise java for our back-end.  We have been using GWT for the last 
>>> 9 years to write thin front ends for our applications.  Basically GWT RPC 
>>> and UiBinder are 99% of the code we deploy.  If I need to replace those 
>>> with Polymer, Angular and some JSON XHR, then I don't see much need to use 
>>> GWT going forward.  Am I mistaken or just misunderstanding something?
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 4:31 AM David > 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 I'm excited that you guys are planning a radical change (really). I 
 hope it becomes more clear on what we should be using to future proof our 
 apps. 
 I hope we will get some usable preview of Singular (if that is really 
 going to be a replacement).

 Somehow I am not totally concerned that we will need some major 
 rewrites, it will be hard sell to management and it might mean that we 
 need 
 to look to different directions as well.

 But I am afraid that if GWT is no longer offering a complete solution 
 like it does now (including a UI library, RPC support, i18n, UI binding, 
 ... etc) that a lot of the advantage will be lost for me.

 As for naming, well it seems that non of the three letters still apply 
 to the direction GWT is about to take.
 1) no longer in Google hands (or so they clame)
 2) Web not the main concern since the cross compiler is more to share 
 code betwee

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Stop calling it GWT 3.0

[James Horsley]

I think that there's enough branding/momentum/etc. behind the GWT name that
to be taken seriously it should stick with the GWT name, even if possibly
adjusted slightly like Jens's suggestions.

I'm fully behind the direction the compiler is taking and I believe that
the vision put forward in the videos from the GWT meetup is a great one
that will resonate well with developers. My big concern is that the
"migration" story and timing isn't great right now.

New projects that are starting with GWT 2.8 are somewhat in limbo right
now. I think that things are okay for the business logic and presenter side
of things, but deciding what to do for the view layer is tricky.

JsInterop doesn't feel complete enough to easily use with libraries like
React for the view layer. I've played around with doing this but it seems
very painful without some of the JsInterop 2.0 features (per
https://goo.gl/sKsBGX) in particular the functionality from the Js class to
easily call JS and create JS collections. As such, the best choice seems to
be UiBinder with HTML+CSS and my own minimal JsInterop interfaces for DOM
types. But even that's not future proof under the current plans to not
support UiBinder. If Singular was available it would probably bridge the
gap, but it's not available so we're left picking from choices that aren't
planned to be in GWT 3.0.

An official JsInterop version of elemental would also be a big help to
prevent everyone from creating their own version and having to migrate
later.

I would recommend a doc/page/etc. be started which clearly lists things
that are definitely going to be in GWT 3.0, those that are under
consideration, and those that definitely won't. Also, give trivial examples
future proof setups that dev's can follow to make the 3.0 transition easier.

Cheers,
James

On 13 June 2015 at 14:44, Jens  wrote:

> I kind of agree not calling it GWT 3.0. I would not name it completely
> different, maybe something along the lines of GWT X1, GWT RST (abbr. of
> reset) or GWT Next. I am pretty sure we could come up with something more
> distinct to indicate that this release is a lot different and a reboot of
> GWT.
>
> I also think that without drop-in replacements for widget code, UiBinder
> and GWT-RPC a lot of apps will not migrate to the new GWT because it is
> simply not cost effective. The GWT surveys shows that the majority of apps
> depend on these features. Maybe with the help of Singular it is possible to
> incrementally rewrite your UI until its compatible with GWT 3.0 but you
> still need to rewrite a lot.
>
> I think at the end it boils down to if you want to use the new compiler or
> if you are fine with the current SDM development speed of the 2.8 release.
> Because all the rest of GWT 3.0 can also be used with GWT 2.8.
>
> -- J.
>
>
>  --
> 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.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/76cb0c63-a981-4b54-95bf-ebbd8f773311%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAHUxr6NjMi-U_HERJVbPfkVx_3tkspTVbfr3NZ0j179ZhyJ6aA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: GWT 2.7 release plan

[James Horsley]

+1 for John's patch 9450  (
sorry to devolve the thread into +1's )

On 9 October 2014 14:04, Thomas Broyer  wrote:

>
>
> On Thursday, October 9, 2014 10:43:38 PM UTC+2, Roberto Lublinerman wrote:
>>
>> I think we will better exclude the following three patches from the
>> release 425e0bb 2b2d81c 920ba90
>>
>> I will either revert them or fix them with a better alternative. Java
>> RegExp implementation is really rough around the edges
>>
>
> If Daniel creates a branch for 2.7 maybe we could revert them on the
> branch only? (given that the next GWT version will probably require Java 7)
>
> --
> 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.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/e8edbfcc-9ba3-46b4-854a-ee9c66471c51%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAHUxr6NceV%2BpqNcujp3L2h%2Be%2ByEq5%3D6kL3G67%3DkqzG4GENMAkg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: who discusses the next features and adopts feature requests?

[James Horsley]

Are there any best practices for open source projects to make integrating
back into main GWT easier in the future e.g. license, code style, etc.? If
so, it may be worth documenting them somewhere so that projects which are
set up with the hope to integrate into GWT if successful can follow those
guidelines.


On 21 May 2014 22:00, John A. Tamplin  wrote:

> A more general answer is that in any community project, whoever cares
> about a feature the most is the one that designs it, convinces others it is
> worth including, and implements it.  Just because something has a lot of
> votes doesn't automatically mean it will get built -- someone has to be
> interested enough to make it happen.  This was the case even when it was a
> Google project, but is especially true now that it is fully owned by the
> community.
>
> --
> John A. Tamplin
>
> --
> 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.
>  To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAM5k6X-MhbBfYZG7nHHWhG%3DOPhBBU3Cc6FaBV5q374vjV9f0Vg%40mail.gmail.com
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAHUxr6PcsgxxqEPJ%2B1wrqPeg640edZF%3DJ5t1efLSd5-O%3DCnH3g%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: GWT-Contributors Hangout on Air Event

[James Horsley]

Completely agree with Jens. Love that these are available to join/watch but
did have difficulty understanding some parts of what was said in the
meeting room.

Thanks for setting it up.


On 28 August 2013 20:25, Jens  wrote:

> Just watched it and I think these hangouts are a great idea.
>
> Is there a way to improve the audio quality especially for the meeting
> room? Sometimes it was a bit difficult to understand what have been said.
>
> -- J.
>
> --
> 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.
>

-- 
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] Email notifications for gerrit code reviews?

[James Horsley]

Ahhh ok. I've signed up for the mailing list and see the entries in the
link you sent. I had still been getting some code review emails even though
I wasn't signed up for that group so hadn't realized.

Thanks for the info on the mailing list and presubmit build requiring the
commiter +1 to trigger.

Cheers,
James


On 13 August 2013 15:51, Daniel Kurka  wrote:

> Matthew changed gerrit to email to a separate list
> gwt-revi...@gwtproject.org<https://groups.google.com/a/gwtproject.org/forum/#!forum/gwt-reviews>
> .
> You can not trigger a presubmit build (for security reasons), one of the
> commiters has to give at least a +1. This triggers a build.
>
> - Daniel
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 4:38 PM, James Horsley wrote:
>
>> There don't seem to be emails going out to gwt-contrib when I make
>> changes to my code review (https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/#/c/2421/)
>> is this the expected behaviour or have I missed a setting?
>>
>> Also, how do I trigger a presubmit build?
>>
>> --
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Google Germany GmbH
>  *Dienerstr. 12*
> *80331 München*
>
> Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
> Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Katherine Stephens
>
> --
> 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.
>
>
>

-- 
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.

[gwt-contrib] Email notifications for gerrit code reviews?

[James Horsley]

There don't seem to be emails going out to gwt-contrib when I make changes
to my code review (https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/#/c/2421/) is this
the expected behaviour or have I missed a setting?

Also, how do I trigger a presubmit build?

-- 
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.

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[James Horsley]

I ported the CR to gerrit a couple of months back
https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/#/c/3186/

Last update I got was that it's pending further review by Thomas Broyer
who's currently tied up with modularization and mavenization. I'm seeing
other RF changes going on though so hopefully it won't require too much
reworking of my original commit.


I totally understand there are limited resources for reviewing this stuff
but it would be quite frustrating if many changes were necessary to my
patch due to underlying changes. I submitted the patch over a year ago and
it's the 6th highest starred issue on the issue tracker from what I can
tell.



On 29 July 2013 16:27,  wrote:

> On 2012/10/30 08:28:07, james.horsley wrote:
>
>> On 2012/06/08 17:20:06, rdayal wrote:
>> > Yep, you're on the CLA list.
>> >
>> > On Fri Jun 08 05:15:45 GMT-400 2012, James Horsley
>> <mailto:james.horsley@gmail.**com >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Just to check, was everything okay with the CLA I signed?
>> > >
>> > > On 7 June 2012 16:56, James Horsley
>>
> <mailto:james.horsley@gmail.**com > wrote:
>
>> > >
>> > > Thanks Rajeev. Let me know if there's anything else you need with
>>
> it.
>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 7 June 2012 16:18, Rajeev Dayal <mailto:rda...@google.com>
>>
> wrote:
>
>> > >
>> > > Thomas, thanks for jumping in.
>> > >
>> > > James, as Thomas said, we'll defer this to 2.5.1, but we'd
>>
> definitely like
>
>> > > to get it in there, as it's an important patch. We just didn't
>>
> want to
>
>> > > force this patch in 2.5.0, which is what we would have to do with
>>
> the
>
>> > > current workload.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks so much for working on this.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu Jun 07 06:23:58 GMT-400 2012,
>>
> <mailto:james.horsley@gmail.**com > wrote:
>
>> > >
>> > > Totally agree on this needing another round. Also, hearing about
>>
> the
>
>> > > plans for a 2.5.1 release which this could potentially be a
>>
> candidate
>
>> > > for is great.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks again.
>> > >
>> > > On 2012/06/07 09:56:52, t.broyer wrote:
>> > > > On 2012/06/07 09:22:24, james.horsley wrote:
>> > > > > Thanks for all your help with the patch Thomas. Sad to hear it
>>
> won't
>
>> > > make it
>> > > > > into GWT 2.5 as we were really looking to use RF with Maps
>>
> without
>
>> > > having to
>> > > > use
>> > > > > a patched version of GWT built from source internally.
>> > >
>> > > > We're planning a 2.5.1 soon after 2.5.
>> > > > There are also several issues with Map support in AutoBeans
>>
> (reported
>
>> > > only
>> > > > recently) which I'd like to get fixed at the same time (some of
>>
> them
>
>> > > are related
>> > > > to how maps are encoded/decoded, so I'd like to have it the same
>>
> in
>
>> > > both
>> > > > AutoBeans and RF; see
>> > > >
>>
> http://code.google.com/p/**google-web-toolkit/issues/**detail?id=7395<http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=7395>for
>
>> > > instance,
>> > > > which you seem to have avoided by using a slightly different
>> > > serialization path
>> > > > for keys, where String keys are encoded as "\"foo\"", vs. "foo"
>>
> in
>
>> > > AutoBean's
>> > > > serialization).
>> > > > Finally, to be honest, I think we need at least one more round
>>
> here: I
>
>> > > need some
>> > > > more time to wrap my head around it.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/**6132056/%253Chttps://www.**
> google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://**codereview.appspot.com/**6132056/<http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/%253Chttps://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/>
> >
>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>>
>
>  I'm possibly being a bit eager given 2.5 GA only just went out but
>>
> thought I'd
>
>> just ping on this with regards to the 2.5.1 release that had been
>>
> mentioned.
>
> Anything new on this?
>
> https://codereview.appspot.**com/6132056/<https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/>
>

-- 
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] Re: GWT Meet-up 2013 Videos & Slides

[James Horsley]

Thanks for releasing these!


On 15 July 2013 17:38, Jim Douglas  wrote:

> The folder isn't public ("You need permission to access this item.").
>
> On Monday, July 15, 2013 3:38:42 PM UTC-7, Bhaskar Janakiraman wrote:
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>> The videos and slides from the GWT Meet-up conference at Google are
>> finally up. I've uploaded them to a newly created GWT Youtube channel:
>> http://www.youtube.com/**channel/**UC5tATYhfu8iits6FpVAJv5g
>>
>> Slides are available in the shared folder: https://drive.google.**
>> com/folderview?id=0B13ku8M7g_**aCU1o1bUZRRUtzOTA&usp=sharing
>> (Not all slides are here yet, but I expect speakers to upload them).
>>
>> Thanks to all the speakers for their talks, and all attendees for making
>> this a successful event.
>> Bhaskar
>>
>  --
> 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.
>
>
>

-- 
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] Work to do for bug 3042

[James Horsley]

Adolfo,

To get the source checked out and compiling follow:
http://www.gwtproject.org/makinggwtbetter.html#workingoncode

To submit the patch use:
http://www.gwtproject.org/makinggwtbetter.html#submittingpatches

I recently had to move an old svn patch into gerrit and the following gave
a very simple way to apply it
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/659467/how-to-apply-svn-diff-to-git just
remember to clean up any leftover .orij and .rej files.

Cheers,
James


On 10 June 2013 10:01, Adolfo Panizo  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> as I wrote in the 
> issue,
> I am able to do the necessary work for solving it.  So, can you guide me
> about the steps that I need to follow in order to create a patch properly?
>
> Would you like to reuse some code of the old 
> patch
> ?
>
> I am going to contact the creator of it because maybe he continues
> interested on fixing the issue and rebase the patch with the last code.
>
> Of course if there are other issues related to RichTextArea I can solve as
> well.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Adolfo.
>
>
>  --
> 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.
>
>
>

-- 
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.

[gwt-contrib] Change in gwt[master]: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/61...

[James Horsley]

James Horsley has posted comments on this change.

Change subject: Redoing existing svn patch  
https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ on new git repo to work with gerrit.

..


Patch Set 1:

Will remember for next time. Thanks!

--
To view, visit https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/3210
To unsubscribe, visit https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/settings

Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: I89d87d39e38b8f1df045494cbe655a44849a650b
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Project: gwt
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Owner: James Horsley 
Gerrit-Reviewer: James Horsley 
Gerrit-Reviewer: Manuel Carrasco Moñino 
Gerrit-HasComments: No

--
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.

[gwt-contrib] Change in gwt[master]: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/61...

[James Horsley]

James Horsley has abandoned this change.

Change subject: Redoing existing svn patch  
https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ on new git repo to work with gerrit.

..


Abandoned

Contains unintended .orig and .rej files. Resubmitted with  
https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/#/c/3186/


--
To view, visit https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/3210
To unsubscribe, visit https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/settings

Gerrit-MessageType: abandon
Gerrit-Change-Id: I89d87d39e38b8f1df045494cbe655a44849a650b
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Project: gwt
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Owner: James Horsley 
Gerrit-Reviewer: James Horsley 
Gerrit-Reviewer: Manuel Carrasco Moñino 

--
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.

[gwt-contrib] Change in gwt[master]: Adds Map support to RequestFactory (see https://code.google....

[James Horsley]

James Horsley has uploaded a new change for review.

  https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/3186


Change subject: Adds Map support to RequestFactory (see  
https://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5524)

..

Adds Map support to RequestFactory (see
https://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5524)

This is a port of an existing svn patch  
https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

onto the new git repo to work with gerrit.

There's a lot of existing discussion on the patch at
https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/. From looking back over that  
discussion
the main user facing design decision to call out which isn't just what  
someone
might expect from Map support is that referencing child complex types in  
keys

and values is done using .with("someMap.keys.property",
"someMap.values.property" )

Change-Id: I6dd3c8a9862473954a72ccee96212c20d9198b22
---
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java

M user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/ResolverServiceLayer.java
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/AbstractRequestContext.java
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/ProxySerializerImpl.java
M  
user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/FindServiceTest.java
M  
user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/RequestFactoryTest.java

A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/MapKey.java
A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/MapValue.java
M user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleFoo.java
M user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/BaseFooProxy.java
A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/MapKeyProxy.java
A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/MapKeyRequest.java
A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/MapValueProxy.java
A  
user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/MapValueRequest.java

M user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/SimpleBarProxy.java
M  
user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/SimpleRequestFactory.java

20 files changed, 897 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)



diff --git  
a/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java  
b/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java

index dd1f28c..2eac320 100644
---  
a/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java
+++  
b/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java

@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@

 import java.util.Collection;
 import java.util.List;
+import java.util.Map;
 import java.util.Set;

 import javax.lang.model.element.ElementKind;
@@ -99,6 +100,12 @@
   TypeMirror param = convertSingleParamType(x,  
state.findType(Collection.class), 0, state);
   return state.types.getDeclaredType((TypeElement)  
state.types.asElement(x), param);

 }
+if (state.types.isAssignable(x, state.findType(Map.class))) {
+  // Convert Map to Map
+  TypeMirror keyParam = convertSingleParamType(x,  
state.findType(Map.class), 0, state);
+  TypeMirror valueParam = convertSingleParamType(x,  
state.findType(Map.class), 1, state);
+  return state.types.getDeclaredType((TypeElement)  
state.types.asElement(x), keyParam, valueParam);

+}
 return defaultAction(x, state);
   }

diff --git  
a/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java  
b/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java

index 9d47dd1..8663ad5 100644
---  
a/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java
+++  
b/user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java

@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@

 import java.util.Collection;
 import java.util.List;
+import java.util.Map;
 import java.util.Set;

 import javax.lang.model.element.ElementKind;
@@ -77,6 +78,19 @@
   }
   return t.getTypeArguments().get(0).accept(this, state);
 }
+if (state.types.isAssignable(t, state.findType(Map.class))) {
+  if (!allowNestedParameterization) {
+return false;
+  }
+  allowNestedParameterization = false;
+  DeclaredType asMap =
+  (DeclaredType) State.viewAs(state.findType(Map.class), t, state);
+  if (asMap.getTypeArguments().isEmpty()) {
+return false;
+  }
+  return t.getTypeArguments().get(0).accept(this, state)
+  && t.getTyp

[gwt-contrib] Change in gwt[master]: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/61...

[James Horsley]

James Horsley has posted comments on this change.

Change subject: Redoing existing svn patch  
https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ on new git repo to work with gerrit.

..


Patch Set 1:

Ick sorry. Will submit a new patch. Should just discard this one or update  
it?


--
To view, visit https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/3210
To unsubscribe, visit https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/settings

Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: I89d87d39e38b8f1df045494cbe655a44849a650b
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Project: gwt
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Owner: James Horsley 
Gerrit-Reviewer: James Horsley 
Gerrit-Reviewer: Manuel Carrasco Moñino 
Gerrit-HasComments: No

--
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.

[gwt-contrib] Change in gwt[master]: Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/61...

[James Horsley]

James Horsley has uploaded a new change for review.

  https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/3210


Change subject: Redoing existing svn patch  
https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ on new git repo to work with gerrit.

..

Redoing existing svn patch https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ on new  
git

repo to work with gerrit.

This patch adds Map support to RequestFactory (see
https://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5524)

There's a lot of existing discussion on the patch at
https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/. From looking back over that  
discussion
the main user facing design decision to call out which isn't just what  
someone
might expect from Map support is that referencing child complex types in  
keys

and values is done using .with("someMap.keys.property",
"someMap.values.property" )

Change-Id: I89d87d39e38b8f1df045494cbe655a44849a650b
---
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java

M user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java
A user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java.orig
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/ResolverServiceLayer.java
A  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/ResolverServiceLayer.java.orig
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java
A  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java.orig
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/AbstractRequestContext.java
A  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/AbstractRequestContext.java.orig
A  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/AbstractRequestContext.java.rej
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java
M  
user/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/ProxySerializerImpl.java
M  
user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/FindServiceTest.java
M  
user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/RequestFactoryTest.java
A  
user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/RequestFactoryTest.java.orig
A  
user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/RequestFactoryTest.java.rej

A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/MapKey.java
A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/MapValue.java
M user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleFoo.java
A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleFoo.java.orig
M user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/BaseFooProxy.java
A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/MapKeyProxy.java
A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/MapKeyRequest.java
A user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/MapValueProxy.java
A  
user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/MapValueRequest.java

M user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/SimpleBarProxy.java
M  
user/test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/SimpleRequestFactory.java

28 files changed, 7,973 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)




--
To view, visit https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/3210
To unsubscribe, visit https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/settings

Gerrit-MessageType: newchange
Gerrit-Change-Id: I89d87d39e38b8f1df045494cbe655a44849a650b
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Project: gwt
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Owner: James Horsley 

--
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] Re: RequestFactory Feature Request: @Immutable EntityProxy, reduced payload size, Map support.

[James Horsley]

Thanks for the udpate and good luck with the modularization work, I saw one
of the dependency graphs you'd shared on g+ and it looked pretty gnarly =/


On 17 April 2013 23:12, Thomas Broyer  wrote:

>
>
> On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 12:17:25 PM UTC+2, James Horsley wrote:
>>
>> Hey Thomas,
>>
>> Totally understand that modularization and mavenization are top
>> priorities but does that mean my Map support patch need to wait until after
>> GWT 2.6?
>>
>
> I'm afraid it'll have to; or put differently I can't guarantee it'll be in
> 2.6, and I wouldn't want to delay 2.6 for that patch (sorry). Time will
> tell.
>
> --
> --
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Google Web Toolkit 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.
>
>
>

-- 
-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit 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] Re: RequestFactory Feature Request: @Immutable EntityProxy, reduced payload size, Map support.

[James Horsley]

Hey Thomas,

Totally understand that modularization and mavenization are top priorities
but does that mean my Map support patch need to wait until after GWT 2.6? I
know things have been in a transitional period but I submitted the patch
almost a year ago now and would love to get the support in; let me know if
there's anything I can do to help get the patch in a better position to go
out.

Hopefully not coming across too negatively as things seem to be picking up
pace in a great way for GWT in the last few months, just would love to get
Map support integrated.

Cheers,
James


On 16 April 2013 23:56, Thomas Broyer  wrote:

>
> On Tuesday, April 16, 2013 7:43:12 PM UTC+2, Stefan Ollinger wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> when editing large object graphs on the client-side, there are currently
>> two problems regarding performance:
>>
>> 1) Entity proxies could not be modified when firing a RequestContext. A
>> diff will be done nevertheless, which costs CPU time. There could be an
>> annotation which marks entity proxies as immutable on the client-side and
>> forces RF to always send the EntityProxyId.
>>
>> 2) All reachable value proxies on the edited data will be sent, even if
>> the owner entity proxies did not change. This increases the payload size
>> and could be avoided by sending only those values proxies which are
>> reachable through actually edited entity proxies (or request arguments).
>> There is already a todo in https://code.google.com/p/**
>> google-web-toolkit/source/**browse/trunk/user/src/com/**
>> google/web/bindery/**requestfactory/shared/impl/**
>> AbstractRequestContext.java#**1211
>>
>> Are you aware of those problems, and are they relevant enough to be taken
>> into account in one of the next releases?
>>
>> Also is there a plan to add support for Maps (https://codereview.appspot.
>> **com/6132056/ .)?
>>
>
> Hi Stefan. I'm the one "responsible" for RF, and my priorities for now are
> on modularization and mavenization.
> Once that's done I'll be back to working on RF. That'll likely be after
> GWT 2.6 lands though.
> Apart from bug fixes and other enhancements (the TODO you're talking
> about), there are a bunch of things I'd like to add/change (e.g. more
> code-gen to use reflection less)
> The @Immutable annotation you're proposing is probably not needed; we
> could base our decision on whether there are setters or only getters.
>
> --
> --
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Google Web Toolkit 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.
>
>
>

-- 
-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit 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] Re: gwt rebranding

[James Horsley]

On 21 March 2013 07:44, James Horsley  wrote:

> I "Great" this over "Gorgerous Web Toolkit" but still prefer the recursive
> definition
>

That was meant to read that I prefer "Great" over "Gorgeous Web Toolkit"..

I really shouldn't reply to emails until I've had my first coffee of the
day =/

-- 
-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit 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] Re: gwt rebranding

[James Horsley]

On 21 March 2013 01:06, Matthew Dempsky  wrote:

> My internal '3-word mission statement' is "Great Web Toolkit". ;)
>

I "Great" this over "Gorgerous Web Toolkit" but still prefer the recursive
definition


>  I'd prefer "GWT Web Toolkit" over "Gwit Web Toolkit", but that's my 2c.
>  I think any "G* Web Toolkit" name will likely be just as descriptive; it's
> not like calling it "Google Web Toolkit" really told you anything more
> about the project other than knowing it's associated with Google! :)
>

Matthew, I completely agree and was definitely proposing the name be "GWT
Web Toolkit" but was just saying that it flowed off the tongue nicely when
said out loud as gwit web toolkit.

-- 
-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit 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] Re: gwt rebranding

[James Horsley]

I really like the re-branding idea; it's important to make the clear
distinction, as Jens and Ray pointed out, that GWT's grown beyond being
just a Google owned project. Ideally it'll be in a place where the question
of "what happens if google stops working on GWT?" isn't even something that
potential adopters worry about when making their decision, much like
Eclipse isn't thought of in the context of IBM anymore.

On the note of @Gorgeous Web Toolkit@, my $.02 is nice but isn't quite
"Gorgeous" isn't geeky enough. The self referential thing is an option and
flows nicely when said out loud "Gwit Web Toolkit" but isn't necessarily
very descriptive.


On 20 March 2013 09:35, Ray Cromwell  wrote:

>
> The rebranding is not about "selling" GWT, it's about the fact that it is
> no longer solely Google-owned.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 1:37 PM, vitaly goji  wrote:
>
>> I tried to convince IT manager to use GWT for a project, but he told me
>> that GWT has poor widgets library and lacks essential things like
>> validation etc..
>> Don't think my manager will change his mind because of re-branding.
>>
>> In a 90's everyone was using Visual Basic. Check out how they got almost
>> all market.
>> Certainly not by asking developers and manages to gamble with third-party
>> libraries.
>> They simply provided developers with what they need to build apps 'out of
>> the box'.
>>
>> And if you look at what is missing in GWT in comparison to POPULAR
>> frameworks, you will see that it would not be too difficult to catch up.
>>
>> On Friday, March 15, 2013 2:07:04 AM UTC-7, Daniel Kurka wrote:
>>
>>> Crosspost from gwt-steering:
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/**msg/gwt-steering/q9bSOldSBFU/**
>>> ki5nQk39fJ8J
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> GWT should rebrand
>>>
>>>
>>>  --
>> --
>> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Google Web Toolkit 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.
>>
>>
>>
>
>  --
> --
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Google Web Toolkit 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.
>
>
>

-- 
-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Web Toolkit 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.

[gwt-contrib] Re: Fix problem where hidden scrollbars prevent clicks through to the scrollable content area on Chr... (issue1886803)

[james . horsley]

On 2013/01/25 19:44:41, Andrew Bachmann wrote:

I was going to submit the exact same patch, so can give a +1 for it
working fine on chrome and FF on win 7.

http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1886803/

--
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

Re: [gwt-contrib] GWT 2.5.1 release - Call for help

[James Horsley]

Thanks Thomas. I'm happy to make any necessary changes to the patch so let
me know when you get more time to look it over again as I know you'd said
it was a big enough change to warrant a long look.


On 15 January 2013 12:24, Thomas Broyer  wrote:

>
>
> On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 12:02:54 PM UTC+1, James Horsley wrote:
>>
>> Anything I can do with 
>> https://codereview.appspot.**com/6132056/<https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/>to
>>  help get it ready to go out with whatever release is deemed appropriate?
>>
>
> Won't make it to 2.5.1 sorry. For the next release after 2.5.1, my first
> task is to finish modularizing and mavenizing GWT, and only then I'll get
> back to fully work on fixing issues.
>
> --
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

Re: [gwt-contrib] GWT 2.5.1 release - Call for help

[James Horsley]

Anything I can do with https://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/ to help get
it ready to go out with whatever release is deemed appropriate?


On 13 January 2013 18:24, Patrick Tucker  wrote:

> Any chance these can get committed?
>
> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1876803/
> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1762803/
> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1833803/
> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1785803/
> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1736804/
>
> On Saturday, January 12, 2013 11:02:41 AM UTC-5, Daniel Kurka wrote:
>
>> Repost from gwt-steering:
>>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> a quick status update. In the last week a lot of patches have been
>> contributed and some have already been submitted.
>>
>> At the beginning of next week I want to close of for any new patches, so
>> that we can finish the work we are started.
>> We are aiming for a code freeze at the 24th of Januar and a release a
>> short time after that.
>>
>> So once again, if you feel strongly that you need to have something
>> included in GWT 2.5.1 now is the time to act.
>> We also have a couple of open issues that we would like to see in GWT
>> 2.5.1, but might not make it (see: https://docs.google.com/**
>> spreadsheet/ccc?key=**0AuK8EZ6jAAQrdDk1ME1lcmtWOWt3M**ngxOUlTMGJSVEE
>> ).
>> Feel free to to contribute patches and do code reviews on the issues
>> listed in the document.
>>
>> -Daniel
>>
>> On Saturday, January 12, 2013 4:17:29 PM UTC+1, Thomas Broyer wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, January 12, 2013 3:40:42 PM UTC+1, Julien Dramaix wrote:

 It would be nice to adapt the following paragraph [1]  to explain the
 procedure for submitting code in gerrit. This paragraph is
 still mentioning svn


 [1] : https://developers.google.com/**web-toolkit/makinggwtbetter?#**
 submittingpatches

>>>
>>> I think the idea was to wait until the move to Git is complete. For now
>>> the Git repo is still a mirror of the SVN repo (git-svn) which is a mirror
>>> of Google's internal Perforce.
>>> To complete the move, we'll rewrite the history to remove all big files
>>> (prebuilt plugins and api-checker reference jars) so all contributors will
>>> have to re-sync their Git repo.
>>> So in the mean time, SVN and Rietveld is still OK, though "deprecated".
>>>
   --
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
>

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

Re: [gwt-contrib] GWT 2.5.1 release - Call for help

[James Horsley]

Any chance of
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5524 making it
into the release since it already has a patch out, or is that too big of a
change for this point release?


On 9 January 2013 13:26, Daniel Kurka  wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> we are gearing up for the GWT 2.5.1 release.
>
> We already made a list of issues that are considered for the GWT 2.5.1
> release: https://docs.google.**com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=**
> 0AuK8EZ6jAAQrdDk1ME1lcmtWOWt3M**ngxOUlTMGJSVEE
> We are looking for help on some of the issues, so if you would like to see
> a specific issue resolved now is a good time to contribute.
>
> If you feel strongly for any other issues please let us know.
>
> -Daniel
>
> --
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

On 2012/06/08 17:20:06, rdayal wrote:

Yep, you're on the CLA list.



On Fri Jun 08 05:15:45 GMT-400 2012, James Horsley

<mailto:james.hors...@gmail.com>

wrote:



> Just to check, was everything okay with the CLA I signed?
>
> On 7 June 2012 16:56, James Horsley <mailto:james.hors...@gmail.com>

wrote:

>
> Thanks Rajeev. Let me know if there's anything else you need with

it.

>
>
> On 7 June 2012 16:18, Rajeev Dayal <mailto:rda...@google.com> wrote:
>
> Thomas, thanks for jumping in.
>
> James, as Thomas said, we'll defer this to 2.5.1, but we'd

definitely like

> to get it in there, as it's an important patch. We just didn't want

to

> force this patch in 2.5.0, which is what we would have to do with

the

> current workload.
>
> Thanks so much for working on this.
>
>
> On Thu Jun 07 06:23:58 GMT-400 2012,

<mailto:james.hors...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Totally agree on this needing another round. Also, hearing about the
> plans for a 2.5.1 release which this could potentially be a

candidate

> for is great.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> On 2012/06/07 09:56:52, t.broyer wrote:
> > On 2012/06/07 09:22:24, james.horsley wrote:
> > > Thanks for all your help with the patch Thomas. Sad to hear it

won't

> make it
> > > into GWT 2.5 as we were really looking to use RF with Maps

without

> having to
> > use
> > > a patched version of GWT built from source internally.
>
> > We're planning a 2.5.1 soon after 2.5.
> > There are also several issues with Map support in AutoBeans

(reported

> only
> > recently) which I'd like to get fixed at the same time (some of

them

> are related
> > to how maps are encoded/decoded, so I'd like to have it the same

in

> both
> > AutoBeans and RF; see
> > http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=7395

for

> instance,
> > which you seem to have avoided by using a slightly different
> serialization path
> > for keys, where String keys are encoded as "\"foo\"", vs. "foo" in
> AutoBean's
> > serialization).
> > Finally, to be honest, I think we need at least one more round

here: I

> need some
> > more time to wrap my head around it.
>
>
>
>


http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/%3Chttps://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/>

>
>
>
>


I'm possibly being a bit eager given 2.5 GA only just went out but
thought I'd just ping on this with regards to the 2.5.1 release that had
been mentioned.

http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[James Horsley]

Just to check, was everything okay with the CLA I signed?

On 7 June 2012 16:56, James Horsley  wrote:

> Thanks Rajeev. Let me know if there's anything else you need with it.
>
>
> On 7 June 2012 16:18, Rajeev Dayal  wrote:
>
>> Thomas, thanks for jumping in.
>>
>> James, as Thomas said, we'll defer this to 2.5.1, but we'd definitely
>> like to get it in there, as it's an important patch. We just didn't want to
>> force this patch in 2.5.0, which is what we would have to do with the
>> current workload.
>>
>> Thanks so much for working on this.
>>
>>
>> On Thu Jun 07 06:23:58 GMT-400 2012,  wrote:
>>
>>> Totally agree on this needing another round. Also, hearing about the
>>> plans for a 2.5.1 release which this could potentially be a candidate
>>> for is great.
>>>
>>> Thanks again.
>>>
>>> On 2012/06/07 09:56:52, t.broyer wrote:
>>> > On 2012/06/07 09:22:24, james.horsley wrote:
>>> > > Thanks for all your help with the patch Thomas. Sad to hear it won't
>>> make it
>>> > > into GWT 2.5 as we were really looking to use RF with Maps without
>>> having to
>>> > use
>>> > > a patched version of GWT built from source internally.
>>>
>>> > We're planning a 2.5.1 soon after 2.5.
>>> > There are also several issues with Map support in AutoBeans (reported
>>> only
>>> > recently) which I'd like to get fixed at the same time (some of them
>>> are related
>>> > to how maps are encoded/decoded, so I'd like to have it the same in
>>> both
>>> > AutoBeans and RF; see
>>> > http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=7395 for
>>> instance,
>>> > which you seem to have avoided by using a slightly different
>>> serialization path
>>> > for keys, where String keys are encoded as "\"foo\"", vs. "foo" in
>>> AutoBean's
>>> > serialization).
>>> > Finally, to be honest, I think we need at least one more round here: I
>>> need some
>>> > more time to wrap my head around it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/<https://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/>
>>>
>>
>

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[James Horsley]

Thanks Rajeev. Let me know if there's anything else you need with it.

On 7 June 2012 16:18, Rajeev Dayal  wrote:

> Thomas, thanks for jumping in.
>
> James, as Thomas said, we'll defer this to 2.5.1, but we'd definitely like
> to get it in there, as it's an important patch. We just didn't want to
> force this patch in 2.5.0, which is what we would have to do with the
> current workload.
>
> Thanks so much for working on this.
>
>
> On Thu Jun 07 06:23:58 GMT-400 2012,  wrote:
>
>> Totally agree on this needing another round. Also, hearing about the
>> plans for a 2.5.1 release which this could potentially be a candidate
>> for is great.
>>
>> Thanks again.
>>
>> On 2012/06/07 09:56:52, t.broyer wrote:
>> > On 2012/06/07 09:22:24, james.horsley wrote:
>> > > Thanks for all your help with the patch Thomas. Sad to hear it won't
>> make it
>> > > into GWT 2.5 as we were really looking to use RF with Maps without
>> having to
>> > use
>> > > a patched version of GWT built from source internally.
>>
>> > We're planning a 2.5.1 soon after 2.5.
>> > There are also several issues with Map support in AutoBeans (reported
>> only
>> > recently) which I'd like to get fixed at the same time (some of them
>> are related
>> > to how maps are encoded/decoded, so I'd like to have it the same in
>> both
>> > AutoBeans and RF; see
>> > http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=7395 for
>> instance,
>> > which you seem to have avoided by using a slightly different
>> serialization path
>> > for keys, where String keys are encoded as "\"foo\"", vs. "foo" in
>> AutoBean's
>> > serialization).
>> > Finally, to be honest, I think we need at least one more round here: I
>> need some
>> > more time to wrap my head around it.
>>
>>
>>
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/
>>
>

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

Totally agree on this needing another round. Also, hearing about the
plans for a 2.5.1 release which this could potentially be a candidate
for is great.

Thanks again.

On 2012/06/07 09:56:52, t.broyer wrote:

On 2012/06/07 09:22:24, james.horsley wrote:
> Thanks for all your help with the patch Thomas. Sad to hear it won't

make it

> into GWT 2.5 as we were really looking to use RF with Maps without

having to

use
> a patched version of GWT built from source internally.



We're planning a 2.5.1 soon after 2.5.
There are also several issues with Map support in AutoBeans (reported

only

recently) which I'd like to get fixed at the same time (some of them

are related

to how maps are encoded/decoded, so I'd like to have it the same in

both

AutoBeans and RF; see
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=7395 for

instance,

which you seem to have avoided by using a slightly different

serialization path

for keys, where String keys are encoded as "\"foo\"", vs. "foo" in

AutoBean's

serialization).
Finally, to be honest, I think we need at least one more round here: I

need some

more time to wrap my head around it.




http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[James Horsley]

Thomas, I've created http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1735803/ as you
requested. Everything look okay with how I set the code review up?

On 7 June 2012 10:22,  wrote:

> Thanks for all your help with the patch Thomas. Sad to hear it won't
> make it into GWT 2.5 as we were really looking to use RF with Maps
> without having to use a patched version of GWT built from source
> internally.
>
> Certainly can switch to the patch being at the trunk/ level and post it
> at the url you gave though.
>
> Also, I signed the CLA via the online form a while back but never heard
> anything back from it. Was I supposed to get a confirmation?
>
>
> On 2012/06/07 09:04:23, t.broyer wrote:
>
>> On 2012/06/07 08:20:34, james.horsley wrote:
>> > Rajeev, get a chance to look at this yet?
>>
>
>  We're cutting out GWT 2.5 soon; we decided to postpone this change to
>>
> the next
>
>> version.
>>
>
>  BTW, sorry for being picky, could you please:
>>  - make your patch at the trunk/ level (rather than trunk/user/)
>>  - post it at 
>> http://gwt-code-reviews.**appspot.com
>>
>
>  Also, have you signed a CLA?
>> See
>>
> https://developers.google.com/**web-toolkit/makinggwtbetter#**
> contributingcode
>
>> >
>> > On 2012/06/05 10:50:18, james.horsley wrote:
>> > > Based on the email thread with Alexis and Thomas I've fixed the
>>
> handling of
>
>> > > nested entities along with adding the appropriate tests to verify
>>
> the
>
>> > behaviour.
>> > > To retrieve nested entities in a Map using .with() the syntax is
>> > > theMap.keys.nestedProp and theMap.values.nestedProp.
>>
>
>
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/**6132056/
>

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

Thanks for all your help with the patch Thomas. Sad to hear it won't
make it into GWT 2.5 as we were really looking to use RF with Maps
without having to use a patched version of GWT built from source
internally.

Certainly can switch to the patch being at the trunk/ level and post it
at the url you gave though.

Also, I signed the CLA via the online form a while back but never heard
anything back from it. Was I supposed to get a confirmation?

On 2012/06/07 09:04:23, t.broyer wrote:

On 2012/06/07 08:20:34, james.horsley wrote:
> Rajeev, get a chance to look at this yet?



We're cutting out GWT 2.5 soon; we decided to postpone this change to

the next

version.



BTW, sorry for being picky, could you please:
  - make your patch at the trunk/ level (rather than trunk/user/)
  - post it at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com



Also, have you signed a CLA?
See

https://developers.google.com/web-toolkit/makinggwtbetter#contributingcode

>
> On 2012/06/05 10:50:18, james.horsley wrote:
> > Based on the email thread with Alexis and Thomas I've fixed the

handling of

> > nested entities along with adding the appropriate tests to verify

the

> behaviour.
> > To retrieve nested entities in a Map using .with() the syntax is
> > theMap.keys.nestedProp and theMap.values.nestedProp.




http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

Rajeev, get a chance to look at this yet?

On 2012/06/05 10:50:18, james.horsley wrote:

Based on the email thread with Alexis and Thomas I've fixed the

handling of

nested entities along with adding the appropriate tests to verify the

behaviour.

To retrieve nested entities in a Map using .with() the syntax is
theMap.keys.nestedProp and theMap.values.nestedProp.




http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

Based on the email thread with Alexis and Thomas I've fixed the handling
of nested entities along with adding the appropriate tests to verify the
behaviour. To retrieve nested entities in a Map using .with() the syntax
is theMap.keys.nestedProp and theMap.values.nestedProp.

http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[James Horsley]

Adding the ".keys." and ".values." disambiguation was much much simpler
than I'd thought thanks to the prefix variable being passed down so can
have the codereview updated with this change very shortly.

On 4 June 2012 13:07, James Horsley  wrote:

> I finally managed to get time to look at this. I added tests to answer to
> Alexis's original question and my current patch out for review would not
> work with his supplied case. Luckily, it was a fairly easy change to
> addPathsToResolution to have it add the child resolutions without handling
> the edge case Thomas pointed out.
>
> I really Thomas's ".keys." and ".values." suggestion for disambiguation of
> a common property name between the key and value types so, unless anyone
> prefers "theMap.e" pulling in both the key's E's and values's E's,
> I'll take a stab at that change.
>
> Let me know if there're any other suggestions.
>
> Cheers,
> James
>
> On 25 May 2012 22:06, Thomas Broyer  wrote:
>
>> AutoBean has no equivalent to these "partial loading"; just like a POJO
>> has no notion of lazy loading, compared to JPA entities.
>> Le 25 mai 2012 21:06, "James Horsley"  a écrit :
>>
>> I read Alexis's email too hastily and hadn't noted he was asking about
>>> nested complex types. I'll add some tests to see how it behaves. I'll be
>>> interested to dig into what AutoBean's behaviour is here as that's what I
>>> based on, mimicked, and leveraged for this patch.
>>>
>>> On 25 May 2012 19:38,  wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012/05/25 17:09:32, james.horsley wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I added tests for complex keys and complex values which're passing so
>>>>>
>>>> it
>>>>
>>>>> should do yes.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I don't see any change to addPathsToResolution...
>>>> Also, how would it work? Say I have a Map, A has a reference "c" to
>>>> a proxy C, and B has a reference "d" to a proxy D. What should I pass to
>>>> Request#with() to get the Ds of B without the Cs of A? with("theMap.d")
>>>> ? Now what if A and B both have a property "e" referencing a proxy E, I
>>>> want B's Es but not A's Es, with("theMap.e") wouldn't work here.
>>>> I think maybe there should be special subproperties "keys" and "values",
>>>> so one can say: with("myMap.keys.c", "myMap.values.d", "myMap.values.e")
>>>> to get A's Cs, and B's Ds and Es (without A's Es!)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://codereview.appspot.com/**6132056/<http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[James Horsley]

I finally managed to get time to look at this. I added tests to answer to
Alexis's original question and my current patch out for review would not
work with his supplied case. Luckily, it was a fairly easy change to
addPathsToResolution to have it add the child resolutions without handling
the edge case Thomas pointed out.

I really Thomas's ".keys." and ".values." suggestion for disambiguation of
a common property name between the key and value types so, unless anyone
prefers "theMap.e" pulling in both the key's E's and values's E's,
I'll take a stab at that change.

Let me know if there're any other suggestions.

Cheers,
James

On 25 May 2012 22:06, Thomas Broyer  wrote:

> AutoBean has no equivalent to these "partial loading"; just like a POJO
> has no notion of lazy loading, compared to JPA entities.
> Le 25 mai 2012 21:06, "James Horsley"  a écrit :
>
> I read Alexis's email too hastily and hadn't noted he was asking about
>> nested complex types. I'll add some tests to see how it behaves. I'll be
>> interested to dig into what AutoBean's behaviour is here as that's what I
>> based on, mimicked, and leveraged for this patch.
>>
>> On 25 May 2012 19:38,  wrote:
>>
>>> On 2012/05/25 17:09:32, james.horsley wrote:
>>>
>>>> I added tests for complex keys and complex values which're passing so
>>>>
>>> it
>>>
>>>> should do yes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't see any change to addPathsToResolution...
>>> Also, how would it work? Say I have a Map, A has a reference "c" to
>>> a proxy C, and B has a reference "d" to a proxy D. What should I pass to
>>> Request#with() to get the Ds of B without the Cs of A? with("theMap.d")
>>> ? Now what if A and B both have a property "e" referencing a proxy E, I
>>> want B's Es but not A's Es, with("theMap.e") wouldn't work here.
>>> I think maybe there should be special subproperties "keys" and "values",
>>> so one can say: with("myMap.keys.c", "myMap.values.d", "myMap.values.e")
>>> to get A's Cs, and B's Ds and Es (without A's Es!)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://codereview.appspot.com/**6132056/<http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/>
>>>
>>
>>

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[James Horsley]

I read Alexis's email too hastily and hadn't noted he was asking about
nested complex types. I'll add some tests to see how it behaves. I'll be
interested to dig into what AutoBean's behaviour is here as that's what I
based on, mimicked, and leveraged for this patch.

On 25 May 2012 19:38,  wrote:

> On 2012/05/25 17:09:32, james.horsley wrote:
>
>> I added tests for complex keys and complex values which're passing so
>>
> it
>
>> should do yes.
>>
>
> I don't see any change to addPathsToResolution...
> Also, how would it work? Say I have a Map, A has a reference "c" to
> a proxy C, and B has a reference "d" to a proxy D. What should I pass to
> Request#with() to get the Ds of B without the Cs of A? with("theMap.d")
> ? Now what if A and B both have a property "e" referencing a proxy E, I
> want B's Es but not A's Es, with("theMap.e") wouldn't work here.
> I think maybe there should be special subproperties "keys" and "values",
> so one can say: with("myMap.keys.c", "myMap.values.d", "myMap.values.e")
> to get A's Cs, and B's Ds and Es (without A's Es!)
>
>
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/**6132056/
>

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[James Horsley]

I added tests for complex keys and complex values which're passing so it
should do yes.

On 25 May 2012 17:01,  wrote:

> Hello
> With your patch, does the function .with() works for a map for example
> in an entity:
>
> Map(String,ServiceParam) params;
>
> requestContext.find(id).with("**params.ServiceParam.Reader");
>
> ServiceParam and Reader are also Entity.
> Will it work?
>
> thanks,
>
>
>
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/**6132056/
>

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

Thanks for the update Rajeev. Look forward to hearing back on the patch.

Cheers,
James

On 2012/05/14 17:04:47, rdayal wrote:

Hey James,



Sorry, I have not had a chance to look this one over, but I am

planning to.

The turnaround on patches has been pretty bad for the past while, and

we're

actively going to make some changes soon that will result in big
improvements (I hope).



In the meantime, we're trying to review and land patches as fast as we

can.

No, you're not being pushy :).




Rajeev




On Thu May 10 16:15:15 GMT-400 2012, 

wrote:


> Rajeev, did you get a chance to look the patch over?
>
> I have no clue on what the turnaround is on submitted patches so
> hopefully am not being too pushy. I saw that GWT 2.5 is close to

being

> released and I'd love to have this functionality available in it.
>
> Thanks!
>
> On 2012/05/07 20:28:44, james.horsley wrote:
> > The instructions at
>
>

https://developers.google.com/web-toolkit/makinggwtbetter#submittingpatches

> say
> > to add this patch to the issue
> >

(http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5524)

> but I don't
> > see how to do that. Is there a permission I'm missing?
>
>
>
>


http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/%3Chttps://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/>

>




http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

Rajeev, did you get a chance to look the patch over?

I have no clue on what the turnaround is on submitted patches so
hopefully am not being too pushy. I saw that GWT 2.5 is close to being
released and I'd love to have this functionality available in it.

Thanks!

On 2012/05/07 20:28:44, james.horsley wrote:

The instructions at


https://developers.google.com/web-toolkit/makinggwtbetter#submittingpatches
say

to add this patch to the issue
(http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5524)

but I don't

see how to do that. Is there a permission I'm missing?




http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

The instructions at
https://developers.google.com/web-toolkit/makinggwtbetter#submittingpatches
say to add this patch to the issue
(http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5524) but
I don't see how to do that. Is there a permission I'm missing?

http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

The latest patch should incorporate all relevant feedback. Including
adding suggested tests and fixing where things when the tests failed.

On 2012/05/03 00:10:56, t.broyer wrote:

http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java

File


src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java

(right):



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java#newcode523

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java:523:

if (ctx instanceof MapPropertyContext &&

((MapPropertyContext)ctx).getKeyType()

!= null) {
> This method is called by both

AutoBeanVisitor.visitCollectionProperty

> and AutoBeanVisitor.visitMapProperty since some of the ctx's

implemented

> both MapPropertyContext and CollectionPropertyContext. The null

checked

> seemed to safely (as best as I could tell) distinguish the cases.



I haven't looked whether there'd be an alternate approach, but it

might at least

be worth a comment in the code.

Added.



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java

File

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java

(right):



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java#newcode135

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java:135:
if

(ValueCodex.canDecode(keyType)) {
> I originally did as you're suggesting but switched after digging

into

> what AutoBean is doing. From what I could tell from
> AutoBeanCodexImpl.MapCoder and
>

http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/wiki/AutoBean#JSON_structures

> AutoBean has been updated to allow non-value type keys; as such I

just

> followed what AutoBean's doing.



Oh, I'm more than OK to mimick AutoBean then!




http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

[gwt-contrib] Re: Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

Will follow shortly with a patch taking into account the following
feedback but wanted to get yours and Rajeev's feedback on some points
before fixing others.

On 2012/05/02 13:59:05, t.broyer wrote:

Adding Rajeev as a reviewer.



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java

File

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java

(right):



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java#newcode86

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java:86:

DeclaredType asCollection =
Rename to asMap ?

Fixed.



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java

File src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java

(right):


http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java#newcode505

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java:505:
accumulator.put(resolveDomainValue(entry.getKey(),

detectDeadEntities),

resolveDomainValue(entry.getValue(), detectDeadEntities));
Line too long.

Fixed



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java#newcode702

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java:702:


accumulator.put(resolveClientValue(entry.getKey(),entryTypes[0]).getClientObject(),

resolveClientValue(entry.getValue(),entryTypes[1]).getClientObject());
Line too long.

Fixed



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java

File


src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java

(right):



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java#newcode523

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java:523:

if (ctx instanceof MapPropertyContext &&

((MapPropertyContext)ctx).getKeyType()

!= null) {
Why is this null-check necessary? (or useful)

This method is called by both AutoBeanVisitor.visitCollectionProperty
and AutoBeanVisitor.visitMapProperty since some of the ctx's implemented
both MapPropertyContext and CollectionPropertyContext. The null checked
seemed to safely (as best as I could tell) distinguish the cases.



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java

File

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java

(right):



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java#newcode25

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java:25:

import com.google.web.bindery.autobean.vm.impl.TypeUtils;
We're in 'shared', so we can't use 'vm' here (unless there's a

super-source

version of the class, which is not the case here).

Unused import that I've removed now.



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java#newcode29

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java:29:

import java.nio.charset.CoderMalfunctionError;
We're in 'shared' and java.nio is not emulated (and EntityCodex has no
super-source version)

Unused import that I've removed now.



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java#newcode135

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java:135:
if

(ValueCodex.canDecode(keyType)) {
So, if the key is a "value type", serialization would use a JSON

object; and

otherwise it'd use two lists?



Can't we have a single serialization for maps? And how about a list of

key-value

pairs rather than a pair of lists (list of keys and list of values)?
Or wouldn't it be easier to simply restrict keys to value types? (like

AutoBean

does already)

I originally did as you're suggesting but switched after digging into
what AutoBean is doing. From what I could tell from
AutoBeanCodexImpl.MapCoder and
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/wiki/AutoBean#JSON_structures
AutoBean has been updated to allow non-value type keys; as such I just
followed what AutoBean's doing.



http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/diff/5012/src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java#newcode141

src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java:141:

Object key = ValueCodex.decode(keyType,

StringQuoter.create(propertyKey));

StringQuoter.create() always creates a String Splittable (isString()

== true,

asString() != null), so ValueCodex won't be able to decode booleans,

numbers or

enums.



=> add a unit test using either an Integer or enum as key.



h

[gwt-contrib] Add Map support to RequestFactory (issue 6132056)

[james . horsley]

Reviewers: t.broyer,

Message:
Thomas, I put you as the reviewer as I believe bobv, whose name was on
the issue, is no longer on the GWT team and I'd noticed you're very well
versed in requestfactory based on your community activity. Please let me
know if I should add/change reviewers.

Thanks!

Description:
Add Map support to RequestFactory (Issue 5524)

I tested it with a simple requestfactory web app in the same eclipse
workspace.

Please review this at http://codereview.appspot.com/6132056/

Affected files:
  M  
src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/ClientToDomainMapper.java
  M  
src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/apt/TransportableTypeVisitor.java

  M src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/Resolver.java
  M  
src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/ResolverServiceLayer.java
  M  
src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleRequestProcessor.java
  M  
src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/AbstractRequestContext.java
  M  
src/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/impl/EntityCodex.java
  M  
test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/FindServiceTest.java
  M  
test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/gwt/client/RequestFactoryTest.java

  M test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/server/SimpleFoo.java
  M test/com/google/web/bindery/requestfactory/shared/BaseFooProxy.java


--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: gwt issues marked as "patcheswelcome" don't show up under open issues

[James Horsley]

Aren't tasks like CellTable column resizing something that the GWT community
are much more likely to have expertise in to implement locally and hopefuly
contribute back (it is open source after all) compared with compiler
optimizations and code splitting? I've been very happy with the speed
improvements to dev mode, compilation, etc. although of course am happy to
have those along with the widget fixes/improvements if the GWT team have
bandwidth :)

On 7 October 2011 12:56, David  wrote:

> This issue is marked now as PatchesWelcome:
>
> http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=6401
>
> So if I understand you correct:
> Resizing columns in the CellTables will not be implemented unless we
> find a way to do it ourselfs ...
> A lot of people are waiting on this rather obvious feature (from the
> perspective of the user at least)
>
> I see some others related to the CellTable that would make it a decent
> component (like horizontal scrolling) also marked as PatchesWelcome.
>
> So after making us wait years for a fast replacement for the incubator
> tables, the cell table has become abandonware as well ?
>
> I'm really starting to regret chosing GWT for development. The only
> thing where there are many commits is the compiler optimisations and
> code splitting stuff ... in my opinion that is a waste of time since
> the browsers are getting faster every day anyway.
>
> David
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Eric Clayberg (Google)
>  wrote:
> > At least for the moment, that is intentional.
> > As you probably know, the GWT issue tracker has not had a lot of love
> > lately, and we would like to fix that. We are undertaking a multi-week
> > project to triage as many of the open issues as we can. We would like to
> > close stale, invalid, fixed & duplicate issues, assign owners as
> > appropriate, or mark issues as "PatchesWelcome" if it is something that
> we
> > think is a reasonable idea but not something we (the GWT development
> team)
> > are going to commit to. By treating "PatchesWelcome" as a closed state,
> we
> > are, in essence, making a positive indication that, while we are happy to
> > look at a patch, we are not going to address this ourselves (similar to
> > "NotPlanned").
> > We are willing to be convinced otherwise, if folks think it is a bad
> idea.
> >
> > --
> > http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
>
> --
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors