gRPC has now browser support https://github.com/grpc/grpc-web , Any news
about GWT-gRPC integration
On Saturday, February 6, 2016 at 5:54:17 PM UTC-5, Tom Davies wrote:
>
> I'm not actively using GWt at present, unfortunately, but I second the
> importance of GWT-RPC.
>
> For me the ability to
A bit of a long pause but I was busy...
Re:
>> ... But RPC in itself is about making compromises on AJAX use ("obscure"
payload, asymmetrical payload because they were not meant to be parsed by
the same tools and in the same environments, everything sent to the URLs,
etc. all of this make it i
Agreed, it's all a matter of perspective. I use GWT-RPC alot, I actually
don't see anything wrong with the underlying mechanisms, except for the
SerializationPolicy and its generator. It's the SerializationPolicy
generation that is the main culprit for the deficiencies perceived in
GWT-RPC.
I was contrasting the blog post to the presentations Ray/Daniel have given
in the past, hence the Singular example preceding what you are quoting.
These are on youtube and I've also attended their presentations in person.
I'm not trying to argue the compilation efficiency of GWT-RPC or get an
That section doesn't touch on "To paraphrase: we have a powerful compiler, let
it do work for you, you can't get that from ." It
talks about the fact the mere presence of a class in the compile classpath
changes the output, and the difficulty of tracking dependencies: add an
"implements X" to a
>
> >
> The compile time argument has me scratching my head.
>
> I can't find any such argument in Daniel's blog post.
>
"Slow compiles due to global analysis" section. Specifically talks about
the global knowledge vs incremental compile issue.
--
You received this message because you are sub
>
The compile time argument has me scratching my head.
I can't find any such argument in Daniel's blog post. The problem certainly is
not compile time vs runtime, it's about global knowledge, scanning the whole
compile classpath (which is slow) and assuming it'll be similar to the runtime
cla
We've been using GWT-RPC for a while now as well, and the alternatives
seemed less desirable the last time I poked around at them. Reading over
some of the cited poor choices GWT-RPC, they seem to me to be more like
"features" and "trade-offs" instead of simply being bad choices.
Version skew
Thanks Daniel for detailed post about GWT-RPC.
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Daniel Kurka
wrote:
> I summed up what I think about GWT RPC and it's future here:
> http://blog.daniel-kurka.de/2016/07/gwt-rpcs-future.html
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 12:01 AM JonL wrote:
>
>> While I agree that
I summed up what I think about GWT RPC and it's future here:
http://blog.daniel-kurka.de/2016/07/gwt-rpcs-future.html
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 12:01 AM JonL wrote:
> While I agree that it could theoretically work with annotations,
> annotations require access to code, so for things you have no co
While I agree that it could theoretically work with annotations,
annotations require access to code, so for things you have no control over,
you either would need to implement custom serialization anyways, or use the
GWT serialization.
I personally think there are optimizations to be had in the
just a side note on this
Although GWT-RPC is the easy low threshold for someone coming from the java
world SOAP, RMI (like me) two things that didn't fly well were:
1) GWT-RPC favors overspecifying the collection type. So it is better to
say ArrayList > List > Collection in your interfaces.
2) I
On Wednesday, July 13, 2016 at 5:53:20 PM UTC+2, Paul Robinson wrote:
>
>
> On 13 Jul 2016 9:17 a.m., "Kay Pac" wrote:
> >
> > Will the gwt serialization mechanism used in GWT-RPC remain? GWT object
> serialization has been plugged into the atmosphere (realtime
> communication/websockets) GWT
On 13 Jul 2016 9:17 a.m., "Kay Pac" wrote:
>
> Will the gwt serialization mechanism used in GWT-RPC remain? GWT object
serialization has been plugged into the atmosphere (realtime
communication/websockets) GWT extension. It would be useful to know if we
should migrate away from the GWT serializati
Will the gwt serialization mechanism used in GWT-RPC remain? GWT object
serialization has been plugged into the atmosphere (realtime
communication/websockets) GWT extension. It would be useful to know if we
should migrate away from the GWT serialization and towards JSON.
On Thursday, July 7, 20
Hey, speak for yourself. ;)
RMI is awesome for prototyping or when the networking aspects are a
secondary feature where performance isn't an issue. Maybe better off as a
library, but still useful.
On Saturday, July 9, 2016 at 6:02:23 PM UTC-5, Hristo Stoyanov wrote:
>
> Gwt-rpc had siMilar fa
Gwt-rpc had siMilar fate as RMI in java - it was cute idea at first, but we
wish it was not in modern java...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to googl
I built an app using GWT and GWT-RPC in 2011-2012, but am currently working
on a clean-slate rewrite of the client using modern JS (ES6, React,
Webpack, etc). I've opted to leave the existing client codebase entirely
as-is, and have exposed my existing backend APIs over JSON-RPC as well.
This
When I first used GWT, I started using GWT RPC as the main communication
channel with the server. Years later, when I first needed a native mobile
application, and when I needed to expose API endpoints to partners to
integrate data with my services, I realized I should have gone RESTful from
da
I have developed a few GWT applications but never used the RPC. I didn't
feel comfortable using RemoveService, RemoteServiceServlet, and ServiceDef;
it reminded me the days of CORBA and IDL. I have been staying with
extending the RequestCallback.
On Thursday, July 7, 2016 at 5:54:11 AM UTC-4, P
On Thursday, July 7, 2016 at 11:54:11 AM UTC+2, Philippe Gonze wrote:
>
> Totally agree. GWT 3.0 without RPC would be GWT 3.dead for many of the
> current GWT developpers,
>
> For me GWT is "Web development based on Java expertise, with practically
> no other technology implications". Extremely
Totally agree. GWT 3.0 without RPC would be GWT 3.dead for many of the
current GWT developpers,
For me GWT is "Web development based on Java expertise, with practically no
other technology implications". Extremely powerful and pleasant. Seems that
GWT 3.0 is announced as "no more GWT":
Our pla
On Sunday, 7 February 2016 18:07:12 UTC+11, Vassilis Virvilis wrote:
>
> AFAIK RestyGWT does not include a server component. You have to rely on
> another jax-rs server-side stack in order to serve RestyGWT requests.
>
> Here is a list of java implementations although nobody forces to stay on
>
AFAIK RestyGWT does not include a server component. You have to rely on
another jax-rs server-side stack in order to serve RestyGWT requests.
Here is a list of java implementations although nobody forces to stay on
java server side
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_API_for_RESTful_Web_Services
O
I didn't realise that RestyGWT did the server side too -- thanks for
getting me to look at it again!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to google-web-too
While I agree that static typing is of great importance I fail to see how
this is a unique feature of GWT-RPC. I believe all alternatives suggested
by people in this thread are statically typed.
On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 12:54 AM, Tom Davies wrote:
> I'm not actively using GWt at present, unfortuna
I'm not actively using GWt at present, unfortunately, but I second the
importance of GWT-RPC.
For me the ability to statically type the interfaces is very important, and
the tooling support that Intellij IDEA provides makes it easy to use.
Are there any statically typed alternatives? It's a sha
Yes, but XMLHttpRequest is a thin wrapper that can easily be replaced with
JsInterop.
(it also uses a Timer, which uses JSNI, that can also easily be replaced
with JsInterop)
On Saturday, February 6, 2016 at 6:59:33 PM UTC+1, Alain wrote:
>
> Does not it rely on xmlhttp request which uses jsni ?
Does not it rely on xmlhttp request which uses jsni ?
On 6 Feb 2016 18:55, "Thomas Broyer" wrote:
> There's no reason it couldn't: does not use generator nor JSNI.
>
> On Saturday, February 6, 2016 at 11:08:15 AM UTC+1, DavidN wrote:
>>
>> Will the RequestBuilder API remain ?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb
There's no reason it couldn't: does not use generator nor JSNI.
On Saturday, February 6, 2016 at 11:08:15 AM UTC+1, DavidN wrote:
>
> Will the RequestBuilder API remain ?
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 9:36 PM Ed wrote:
>
>> RestyGWT is one of the options. Another less mentioned is the low level
>
Will the RequestBuilder API remain ?
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 9:36 PM Ed wrote:
> RestyGWT is one of the options. Another less mentioned is the low level
> RequestBuilder. We moved to RB due to the large number of fields we are
> managing (400+) and use json on the client to consume the requests
Dear All,
Please any one let me know Where can I download GWT-3.0 package
Ramesh
On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 4:36 AM, Ed wrote:
> RestyGWT is one of the options. Another less mentioned is the low level
> RequestBuilder. We moved to RB due to the large number of fields we are
> managing (400+) an
RestyGWT is one of the options. Another less mentioned is the low level
RequestBuilder. We moved to RB due to the large number of fields we are
managing (400+) and use json on the client to consume the requests.
Ed
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:44 AM, Vassilis Virvilis wrote:
> I have successfully
I have successfully ported a medium API (~30 methods) from GWT-RPC to
Resty-GWT. While everybody's case is unique it went surprisingly well for
me (as far as transitions go).
1) The big advantage is that although you can use RestyGWT with a
procedural SOAP logic (like GWT-RPC) you can start famili
I always had a love/hate relation with GWT-RPC. I loved it that indeed it
allowed you to quickly add remote calls.
But in bigger applications many of its restrictions started to have a big
impact.
For example it was a pain to do proper integration or performance testing
with GWT-RPC services since
I understand that the future of GWT RPC does not seem bright in 3.0+ but I
want to express my opinion that this is a HUGE mistake. GWT RPC is one of
the most important things in GWT as it truly ties things together in large
apps. Sure, it its raw form it is a bit cumbersome to use but it enables
36 matches
Mail list logo
