Thanks Ignacio,
Indeed. Our app will probably stay on the GWT 2.8 "branch" for a long time
to come. Hopefully in that time something better will come along. We are
mainly betting heavily on Java, JPA, lots of client side code... So
hopefully won't be too painful a switch.
Cheers
Sam
On Frida
Salk31, please note that we are saying that if you are going to start
learning RF right now, you better try other approach. But as you said, RF,
editor framework, probably validations, ui binder, etc is a pretty good
solution. You should note that this solution is not going to evolve anymore
(I thi
>
> And who knows, maybe one day we'll finally have grpc-web ;-)
>
Oh please! +1
--
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-toolkit+unsubscr...@g
On Friday, January 6, 2017 at 1:11:35 PM UTC+1, Ignacio Baca Moreno-Torres
wrote:
>
> Hehe this is not a bad thing! Just means that now exists simpler
> solutions. I personally think that RF keeps track of object (the entity id)
> which add really a lot of complexity, at this point I think tha
I can definitely see that it is complex (like compiler, garage collection,
rdbms...) so it needs to outweigh that cost. My problem is that I really
like UiBinder + Editor + RequestFactory and we have a large app built
around this. I've been doing web for 25 years and it finally felt mature.
Do
I migrated everything from RPC to RF. Thinking it was a better alternative
to 3rd party libs and could be sustainable when 3.0 arrives was I wrong in
this thinking?
Regards
On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Ignacio Baca Moreno-Torres <
igna...@bacamt.com> wrote:
> Hehe this is not a bad thing! Ju
Hehe this is not a bad thing! Just means that now exists simpler solutions.
I personally think that RF keeps track of object (the entity id) which add
really a lot of complexity, at this point I think that the lib should
include some kind of storage with remote synchronization because if not,
the c
:(
On Monday, December 26, 2016 at 2:11:35 PM UTC, Thomas Broyer wrote:
>
> +1 Do not start learning/using RequestFactory (or even GWT RPC I'd say).
> Learn JsInterop and use json-based http APIs.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT
Users" group.
T
+1 Do not start learning/using RequestFactory (or even GWT RPC I'd say). Learn
JsInterop and use json-based http APIs.
--
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
Hi, a side note. IMO you should not start using request factory. It is a
pretty awesome lib which solves a lot of problem which probably you don't
have with the cost of a complexity which will make you ask a lot of doubt's
like this one for a long time. IMO if you want a API focused in your model,
Hi everyone,
I got a question regarding datatypes. I got a object on the server side
that has a value of type Object. Like this:
class MyObject{
public *Object *getValue();
public void setValue(*Object *value);
}
How is it possible to have proxies for this object on the client side (wi
11 matches
Mail list logo
