We will be putting the Rietveld server at
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/ into read-only mode for a few hours at
about 5pm Eastern Time tomorrow, Thursday August 4th, to deal with some
maintenance.
rjrjr
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
I'm still not crazy about having addClientData() and getClientData() on
separate objects. It seems to me that you've violated your own principal
that the GeneratorContext should be the only object that has to get passed
to the generator's helpers.
Can addClientData() move to the context? That
Oh, and putClientData seems like a better name.
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
I'm still not crazy about having addClientData() and getClientData() on
separate objects. It seems to me that you've violated your own principal
that the GeneratorContext should
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:36 PM, jbrosenb...@google.com wrote:
On 2011/08/03 20:03:28, rjrjr wrote:
Oh, and putClientData seems like a better name.
Done
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Ray Ryan mailto:rj...@google.com
wrote:
I'm still not crazy about having addClientData
LGTM
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 4:17 PM, jbrosenb...@google.com wrote:
Well, a generator has to keep it's own state anyway, in practice. In
the case of AbstractClientBundleGenerator, it actually creates a
ResourceContext and passes that around, along with the GeneratorContext
(this was before
Lets warn gwt-announce that the default will change next Tuesday, and
encourage them to try it out themselves in the meantime. Are you okay
driving that, and with waiting another week?
On Aug 2, 2011 6:33 AM, her...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: rjrjr,
Description:
Making lazy widgets
I was biting my tongue on this one, but I guess I'll jump in and agree, this
smells bad.
@jlabanca, is there no hook in Column or maybe Cell.Context where this kind
of app-specific data can be added?
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Jeff Larsen larse...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm inclined to agree
can update to that and revert this if you like.
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
I was biting my tongue on this one, but I guess I'll jump in and agree,
this smells bad.
@jlabanca, is there no hook in Column or maybe Cell.Context where this
kind of app
Hi there:
Assuming that your lists are named listB, listC, listD, then you would
write:
.with (A.listB, A.listB.listC, A.listB.listC.listD)
to cause your various proxies to be populated by a single call to the
server.
Hope that helps,
Ryan
On Jul 31, 3:31 pm, basilboli basilb...@gmail.com wrote
I posted a message about this recently, and was pointed to the bug
referenced by Brian below.
Currently you do need to have getters in order for AutoBean to know
the property exists.
Ryan
On Jul 30, 11:44 am, Brian Reilly brian.irei...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is a known bug. I saw
extends EntityProxy, and the other proxy interfaces then extend
ShapeProxy, right?
Thanks for clarifying for me,
Ryan
On Jul 27, 1:55 pm, David Chandler drfibona...@google.com wrote:
GWT 2.4.0 adds a new DataGrid widget with scrollable data area and
many enhancements to RequestFactory
(seehttp
for
determining which interfaces need to have a proxy generated for
them).
Adding a use case before the technical details would make the
documentation a bit easier to understand, at least for me.
Ryan
On Jul 28, 7:41 pm, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 28, 2011 11:38:55 PM UTC+2
Unnur, would you be comfortable taking this?
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 12:12 PM, b...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: rjrjr,
Message:
This is a re-spin of a patch that was written back in October but that
got dropped. The original patch is at
default values set on the client-side proxy, but not have the object
persisted. Unfortunately that's not possible.
Ryan
On Jul 25, 11:05 am, Jakob Mar jakob.runars...@gmail.com wrote:
Using RequestFacory I am trying to create an object on the server like this:
public imterface FooRequestContext
I've shared a publicly visible copy here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Oo_imxskoGX5O9l9LhHDtJ0yJkHvNTNQqU3dkkekZYI/edit?hl=en_US
Does that work for you?
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 3:22 PM, stephen.haber...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it okay to make that public?
I think it is OK. We usually
.
Ryan
On Jul 20, 2:02 pm, Bruno Henrique f203...@gmail.com wrote:
Can someone give an simple example how to use oracle with GWT, using RPC?
I tried to do something here, but I got the error:
java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: java.net.Socket is a restricted class.
Please see the Google App Engine
in the EntityProxy, only getters and setters for
properties that should be exposed to the client
This doesn't explicitly say that both getters and setters are required
for a property.
Ryan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To post
Thanks for the suggestions, guys. That really helps.
Ryan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-web
the client-side equivalent of a runtime
properties file that I can change in a deployed WAR file without
recompiling.
I realize that I could use GWT Constants for this, but my purposes
aren't really for i18n, and I still can't modify the properties
without recompiling. Any suggestions?
Ryan
--
You
if there is a better way to handle this. Since my service
doesn't have any way to communicate with the RF framework, I think the
answer is no, but I thought I would check.
Thanks!
Ryan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To post
to without. If I do need some of the proxies, it's
likely that I want all of the components, not just the proxy itself.
Does anyone else think this is a good idea? I don't think it would be
hard to implement, as the necessary code simply requires some
reflection oriented code on the server.
Ryan
I am pretty sure that part of the optimization the compiler does is to
only include code in the generated .js file that is actually in use.
Therefore, only implementations of the methods in modules A B that
are used by your Login module will be downloaded by the client.
Ryan
On Jun 30, 12:58 pm
Nope, not using editors. I haven't dove into that part of the data
tools yet.
Ryan
On Jun 30, 2:16 pm, Jeff Larsen larse...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you using editors? If so, you can do
fetchRequest.with(editorDriver.getPaths());
Check out the PersonEditorWorkflow.java in Dynatablerf
this work are welcome.
Thanks in advance for any ideas.
Ryan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-web
of the
common server interface). I don't like it, but it seems to be
working.
Ryan
On Jun 27, 10:00 am, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, June 27, 2011 12:40:05 PM UTC+2, Ryan McFall wrote:
I have two domain objects that implement the same interface on the
server, and a third class
to see what's
happening.
Does anyone know what other conditions besides the ones that I've
checked might cause this to happen?
Thanks in advance,
Ryan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To post to this group, send email to google
, and was hoping to test it without doing
so.
Ryan
On Jun 27, 11:52 am, Ryan McFall mcfall.r...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a call to RequestContext.create that is failing, and I can't
figure out why. The error message that I'm getting indicates that the
interface that I am passing to .create
David:
Yep, I thought of that, and have implemented it. It seems to work
well. Thanks for your help!
Ryan
On Jun 24, 9:32 am, David Chandler drfibona...@google.com wrote:
Hi Ryan,
The proxy you get from RequestContext.create() won't be updated
automatically. Your persist method should
name). Is
this when the Locator create method is called - the first time a
method referencing the proxy is invoked when the proxy is not
associated with an instance on the client?
Thanks for helping clear up my confusion.
Ryan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
the proxy for this to
happen.
Ryan
On Jun 23, 3:36 pm, Kevin Anderson kev...@gmail.com wrote:
The purpose of the create method is to associate a request context with the
newly created object. It has to be done through the RequestContext so that
it can be managed and all the goodies that come
here, but honestly I don't know much about how that
works - where is a good place to look for docs (the getting started
with RequestFactory guide doesn't really talk about it).
Ryan
On Jun 23, 4:07 pm, David Chandler drfibona...@google.com wrote:
Ryan, you're correct. Nothing on the server gets
can
look to see if the bug that you pointed out is indeed the source of
the problem?
Thanks,
Ryan
On Jun 20, 4:45 pm, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2011 9:08:31 PM UTC+2, Ryan McFall wrote:
Implementing the setSurveyPermissions method as you suggested seems
report and try to work around it in my code.
Thanks!
Ryan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-web
be.
Thanks for your help!
Ryan
On Jun 20, 1:33 pm, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
If you haven't changed the collection in any way, and Survey is mapped as an
EntityProxy (not a ValueProxy), the setter shouldn't be called.
But back to your issue: if Hibernate is supposed to manage
was many-to-many or one-to-many.
Thanks again for the thoughts - it's great having someone respond so
quickly!
Ryan
On Jun 20, 2:01 pm, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, June 20, 2011 7:44:56 PM UTC+2, Ryan McFall wrote:
I haven't changed the collection, and SurveyProxy
as
needing update. Am I right in that interpretation?
If so, I'm not sure why this is happening. Does the client keep track
of method calls to determine what needs to be updated, or something
else?
Ryan
{T:edu.hope.cs.surveys.dao.ISurveyInfo,V:MC4w,P:{tags:
[{T:edu.hope.cs.surveys.dao.ITag,S:IjIi
, but it pollutes the interface to the server-side
objects.
Ryan
On Jun 16, 10:10 pm, isern juanis...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi fellas,
I was wondering if there's a chance that a concrete POJO could be used
as an EntityProxy when serializing a graph via the RequestFactory
framework.
I mean, for most
Scratch this question for now - I'm fairly sure it's Hibernate that is
calling the setters when loading the objects based on the objects in
the request payload, not RequestFactory calling them.
Ryan
On Jun 18, 4:59 pm, Ryan McFall mcfall.r...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a POJO that contains several
LGTM
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:09 AM, rchan...@google.com wrote:
On 2011/06/14 16:54:43, rdcastro wrote:
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.**appspot.com/1455804/http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1455804/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Ready for review.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:03 PM, rj...@google.com {subItem.from.uri}
wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1446819/http://www.google.com/url?sa=Dq=http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1446819/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
this ApplicationBundle object to pass presenter-specific
information? I.e., a specific view or place provider? If so, how do
you parameterize the bundle to work for all presenters?
Ryan
On Jun 10, 6:37 am, Ben Imp benlee...@gmail.com wrote:
I use an object called ApplicationModel, that is passed
As soon as we have done that, we can't make changes to UiBinderWriter and
all the other classes the parsers actually talk to, nor can we make sweeping
changes to the code they generate.
If the problem is retrofitting widgets you don't own, would a non-annotation
alternative to UiChild get the job
:
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
As soon as we have done that, we can't make changes to UiBinderWriter and
all the other classes the parsers actually talk to, nor can we make
sweeping
changes to the code they generate.
If the problem is retrofitting widgets you
LGTM
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 10:29 AM, jul...@google.com wrote:
Uploaded patch with assertion in DOM.insertListItem as patch set 3.
http://gwt-code-reviews.**appspot.com/1454810/diff/3001/**
things can be stored,
sort of like session-scoped map of attribute in a servlet. Is this
the best way to do it? What other patterns or approaches would you
suggest?
Many thanks!
Ryan
* I probably wouldn't use GWT for login credentials in a real
production app, but instead use a 3rd-party security
plugin.
Thanks!
Ryan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Google Web Toolkit group.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
google-web-toolkit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
error message, right? Adding must
extend EntityProxy would seem to make it quite clear what had gone
wrong.
Ryan
On Jun 7, 5:05 pm, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, June 7, 2011 9:56:10 PM UTC+2, Ryan McFall wrote:
For others who might see this message, I quickly discovered
of hard to diagnose.
Below are the relevant interfaces/classes. Thanks in advance for any
ideas.
Ryan
-
package edu.hope.cs.surveys.dao;
import
to indicate to me there is something wrong
with the Tag class, rather than the true source of the error. Perhaps
the error message could have been different, but I place at least 90%
of the blame squarely on my own shoulders :-)
Ryan
On Jun 6, 2:02 pm, Ryan McFall mcfall.r...@gmail.com wrote:
I am
written for .color-icon.
Ryan
On Jun 6, 3:05 pm, Lars Ruoff lars.ru...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
yes, i know, but the problem is that:
ToggleButton has its predefined style gwt-Togglebutton or similar.
That style defines a background-image for the button.
In order to set a background color i
In general we try to be null-intolerant, although I don't know how
consistent we are about it. Basically, nulls should never be quietly cleaned
up for you but rather should fail fast if practical. If null is a legal
value, it should serve a specific purpose.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:44 AM,
That is an excellent question.
I don't think anyone has yet tried to go that route in earnest, and I
suspect the first to do so will find that IsWidget is not yet as first class
as it should be, just due to undiscovered corner cases and such. But it sure
would be interesting to try to make it
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 8:16 AM, jlaba...@google.com wrote:
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1450810/diff/6002/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/PotentialElement.java
File user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/PotentialElement.java
(right):
LGTM
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 1:39 PM, jbrosenb...@google.com wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1450806/diff/3002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/GeneratorContext.java
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/GeneratorContext.java (right):
LGTM
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 7:38 AM, b...@google.com wrote:
The base interface for RequestFactory service endpoints.
Add disclaimer explaining that this interface (and the others) are
normally
implemented by generated code, and are subject to incompatible
updates?
Done. Also added a
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 5:46:34 PM UTC+2, Jeff Larsen wrote:
On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 10:21:18 AM UTC-5, Thomas Broyer wrote:
On Wednesday, May 25, 2011 3:29:35 PM UTC+2, Jeff Larsen wrote:
Wow, this is
LGTM
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 11:53 AM, sbruba...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: rjrjr,
Description:
Fix escaping issue with SafeHtml in Safari3
Review by: rj...@google.com
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1443806/
Affected files:
M
LGTM
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 5:04 AM, gaill...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: rjrjr,
Description:
Add the method name to the message of InvocationService to make it
easier to
find out the rootcause of the exception.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1450803/
The blog post would be great. We'll plunder from it freely for our own
samples and docs.
One note: lately we've been using Objectify rather than JDO for appengine
apps. It's pretty pleasant.
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 7:31 AM, Etienne P. etienne...@gmail.com wrote:
I've gone through the same
r10214
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 6:04 AM, jlaba...@google.com wrote:
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1450802/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Rather than detaching, could you render the new contents in a hidden div and
then replace the tbody?
IE is a little tricky about doing this kind of thing with table elements,
but HTMLPanel.HTMLPanel(String, String) shows the workaround for that (just
render inside a div and all is forgiven).
On
You're working too hard in IE. You don't need to create the entire table,
you can create fragments so long as you're doing it inside a div
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:21 PM, jlaba...@google.com wrote:
committed as r10218 before I read Ray's comment.
On 2011/05/24 20:06:24, rjrjr wrote:
We're trying to make bindery the correct location, but we're a bit in
mid-step.
But you shouldn't have to have two instances. gwt...EventBus extends
binder...EventBus.
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 10:29 AM, dd cafeb...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hey g-men,
with GWT 2.3 the autobean, event and
Meh, that's a lot of work for not a lot of gain.
Why don't we just move it to user.client.ui, right next to
AbstractImagePrototype? I don't see why we'd make it a nested class.
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 10:32 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
I was wondering if we should move the code from
LGTM
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:09 PM, jlaba...@google.com wrote:
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1422816/diff/8001/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/DocumentModeAsserter.java
File user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/DocumentModeAsserter.java
(right):
Looks good to me.
Do you still need the patch that brings back GwtEvent.setSource, or is this
enough by itself?
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 3:58 PM, stephen.haber...@gmail.com wrote:
Reviewers: rjrjr,
Description:
Adds two protected static methods to EventBus that expose otherwise
inaccessible
I was wondering if we should move the code from abstract image prototype
here, make it depend on the renderer. Deferred binding and all. What do you
think?
On May 19, 2011 9:41 PM, jlaba...@google.com wrote:
Yes please, we shouldn't have broken existing code like that.
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Stephen Haberman
stephen.haber...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
With the bindery package change, I have a custom EventBus implementation
that no longer compiles. I was calling GwtEvent.setSource (and
Sneaky. You asked for package protected. I don't want to *expand* the public
foot print.
On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 3:34 PM, stephen.haber...@gmail.com wrote:
Reviewers: rjrjr,
Description:
Redefines Event.setSource in the GwtEvent subclass to restore
c.g.g.e.shared package visibility.
Bob V is the authority here, but he's on vacation this week.
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 7:08 AM, Patrick Julien pjul...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is what I am planning to do to fix issue 6068
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=6068
1. Add to BeanMethod.java (package
Verbal LGTM from John.
r10167
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 1:40 PM, rj...@google.com wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1444801/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Filing a bug would be helpful, thanks.
If you want to offer a fix the details are at
http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/makinggwtbetter.html
On May 6, 2011 12:50 AM, Laurent Le Goff legoff.laur...@gmail.com wrote:
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 7:52 AM, rchan...@google.com wrote:
On 2011/05/05 22:15:56, rjrjr wrote:
Rietveld is choking on this.
Yes, something is broken in my git5 client that plays badly with
reitveld.
The non-eclipse instructions in the README.txt are wrong, aren't they?
ant war can't
LGTM, by the way.
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Rodrigo Chandia rchan...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
But the distributed app does get the necessary jars in war/WEB-INF/lib
and produce a proper war.
Cool. How?
'samples/build.xml
LGTM
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 12:13 PM, rchan...@google.com wrote:
OK, I promise I'll try to fix my rietveld reviews. Please use the
Unified diff view for the time being.
On 2011/05/06 19:01:27, rchandia wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1438802/
--
Rietveld is choking on this.
The non-eclipse instructions in the README.txt are wrong, aren't they? ant
war can't work because
of the missing appengine jars. Shouldn't we be saying that the sample
is configured to assume you're using GPE?
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 2:59 PM, rchan...@google.com
Rodrigo, it looks like John is on vacation for the rest of the week. Can you
finish this review?
On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 2:24 PM, rj...@google.com wrote:
Ready for another look.
OrientationMonitor is replaced with OrientationHelper. John, I think
I've stumbled onto a pretty nice widget plugin
This is probably html unit honoring the locale and changing its behavior
from what the tests expect.
On May 4, 2011 2:02 AM, t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2011/05/03 17:51:18, rjrjr wrote:
Running ant clean dist-dev test, this appears to break the i18n suite
under
html unit.
Oops! Only tested
Please tell me that this is the last step in the following chain. It seems
unlikely if you're only providing the property now.
First you provide the property to allow quirks, and give compiler warnings
that only go away if you set standards mode or set the quirks property. (And
publicize that it
I mean that you should have been able to fix it by replace place1 == place2
with place1.equals(place2).
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:39 AM, jlaba...@google.com wrote:
@rjrjr -
What do you mean?
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1428810/
--
in place yet that we could implement
app specific client side caching in a sample like this?
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
I mean that you should have been able to fix it by replace place1 == place2
with place1.equals(place2).
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:39 AM
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Bob Vawter robertvaw...@google.com wrote:
Bob, I've lost track -- are there hooks in place yet that we could
implement
app specific client side caching in a sample like this?
You can call RequestFactory.getSerializer() with an implementation of
a ProxyStore
I'd be inclined to start with a) and see what happens.
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 10:02 AM, rdcas...@google.com wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1427812/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/ui/AttachableHTMLPanel.java
File
at 12:58 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Bob Vawter robertvaw...@google.comwrote:
Bob, I've lost track -- are there hooks in place yet that we could
implement
app specific client side caching in a sample like this?
You can call RequestFactory.getSerializer
Once we've validated the work, seems like a lot of the Attachable support
should be baked into UiObject, Widget and Panel in some kind of opt-in
manner.
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 10:20 AM, Rafael Castro rdcas...@google.com wrote:
Liked it. With the stuff I added to our subclass of
I guess I'm speaking strictly of the null checks. It's fine for our sample
code not to have a real auth system in its storage, of course.
Seems like your UserServiceWrapper should have a requireCurrentUserId()
method that throws an exception if there is no id, and Task shouldn't be
friendly. Is
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Thomas Broyer t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, May 3, 2011 3:34:42 PM UTC+2, decitrig wrote:
After upgrading to 2.3.0, I was getting a warning about
UiBinder.useSafeHtmlTemplates being false. I couldn't find any documentation
on this, but looking
LGTM
Thanks, will submit.
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:40 AM, t.bro...@gmail.com wrote:
Reviewers: rjrjr, bobv,
Description:
Force locale to en_US for user unit tests
Force locale to en_US for user unit tests, otherwise validation tests
fail (use hard-coded checks on locale-dependent
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 9:49 AM, her...@google.com wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1427809/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/uibinder/client/LazyDomElement.java
File user/src/com/google/gwt/uibinder/client/LazyDomElement.java
(right):
LGTM
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 9:49 AM, her...@google.com wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1427809/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/uibinder/client/LazyDomElement.java
File user/src/com/google/gwt/uibinder/client
, 2010 actual=It is 2010 Feb 15
junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Remote test failed at 172.31.131.172 /
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.19)
Gecko/2010031422 Firefox/3.0.19
expected=It is Feb 15, 2010 actual=It is 2010 Feb 15
On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Ray Ryan rj
LGTM
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 2:06 PM, rdcas...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: rjrjr,
Description:
Fix Attachable for those poor fellows who don't have the bliss of
SafeHtml enabled (yet).
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1426808/
Affected files:
M
This still appears to have all the problems of
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1426803.
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 11:33 AM, rchan...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: rjrjr,
Description:
SafeHtmlRenderer code gen for UiBinder.
Picking-up patch from rietveld issue 1426803
Please review this
Thanks guys!
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Daniel Bell daniel.r.b...@gmail.comwrote:
We just upgraded 3 apps too, with one gotcha: it turns out that you need to
do a find/replace on com.google.gwt.requestfactory.client. -
com.google.web.bindery.requestfactory.gwt.client. before you
do
LGTM++
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:27 AM, unn...@google.com wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1425811/diff/5001/user/test/com/google/gwt/uibinder/test/client/LazyWidgetBuildersTest.java
File
user/test/com/google/gwt/uibinder/test/client/LazyWidgetBuildersTest.java
(right):
It is already the case that you can use IsWidget interfaces as elements in a
ui.xml file.
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Stephen Haberman
stephen.haber...@gmail.com wrote:
It looks like that would fix
Huh. Yeah, that is interesting. Is the widgets must extend Widget
restriction being
Okay, done, now with passing JRE tests.
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:35 PM, rj...@google.com wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1420814/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Turns out the useLazyWidget stuff isn't passing all of the UiBinder tests
yet. Ignoring that path for now seems reasonable. Sorry for the flip flop.
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 3:19 PM, rj...@google.com wrote:
Oh, the base class exists already:
com.google.gwt.text.shared.AbstractSafeHtmlRendererT
You sure? I kind of liked how you changed this to always run, and explain to
the user what flag to set to make it go.
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 5:43 PM, her...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: rjrjr, jat,
Description:
LazyPanel parser should be enabled only if useLazyWidgetBuilders is
enabled.
the
proper message.
2. let things as is and register the new LazyPanel parser only if the flag
is enabled
Due to the urgency of things I went with #2.
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Ray Ryan rj...@google.com wrote:
You sure? I kind of liked how you changed this to always run
101 - 200 of 894 matches
Mail list logo
