[gwt-contrib] Re: RFC : Adding deprecations to gwt.xml files

2009-04-07 Thread Isaac Truett
I'd vote for a consistent message supplied by the compiler/hosted mode and freeform text provided by the module developer. I think that works fine for JavaDoc @deprecated. URLs and the names of successor modules can be included in the freeform text when appropriate. Unless you're planning to plug

[gwt-contrib] Re: weak listener in GWT?

2009-04-07 Thread Ed
He Miroslav, Thanks for the tip: > listeners to a container class that also implements the listener. Then   I considered it as well, it's kind of categorizing the listeners, but doesn't work in my case. Le me explain: the screen consists of all kind o wizard kind of screens that the user can bro

[gwt-contrib] Re: RFC : Adding deprecations to gwt.xml files

2009-04-07 Thread Joel Webber
I have to say I'm with Isaac on this one. I think it's best to keep things as simple as possible, and to keep the documentation in one place wherever possible. There's nothing stopping anyone from putting URLs in the explanatory text if they want, but I wouldn't want to have to do that in the defau

[gwt-contrib] Re: RFC : Adding deprecations to gwt.xml files

2009-04-07 Thread Isaac Truett
Oh, and... as much as I hate to suggest it, we will probably need some way to suppress the deprecation warning. Maybe: Where ignore-deprecation is optional and defaults to false. I'm tempted to say that ignore-deprecation="true" on a non-deprecated module produces a warning, just to discourage

[gwt-contrib] Re: review request: clean up the RPC compile-time noise

2009-04-07 Thread Lex Spoon
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Freeland Abbott wrote: >> The main thing is that many problems are still logged via TreeLogger >> and not stored in the ProblemReport.  Shouldn't we jump over >> consistently to the new system rather than have a mix?  Are there any > > Probably; I was worried that

[gwt-contrib] [google-web-toolkit commit] r5192 - Removes some code accidentally committed along with r5191.

2009-04-07 Thread codesite-noreply
Author: sp...@google.com Date: Tue Apr 7 09:53:21 2009 New Revision: 5192 Modified: trunk/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/MakeCallsStatic.java Log: Removes some code accidentally committed along with r5191. Modified: trunk/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/impl/MakeCallsStatic

[gwt-contrib] Error message after ClientBundle/CssResource upgrade

2009-04-07 Thread Eric Ayers
Hi Bob, [ERROR] The specified property 'name' is not of the correct type; found 'ConfigurationProperty' expecting 'BindingProperty' This message came up in my project when we migrated from incubator ImmutableResourceBundle to the new trunk ClientBundle a. By trial and error, here's the offendin

[gwt-contrib] Re: Error message after ClientBundle/CssResource upgrade

2009-04-07 Thread BobV
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Eric Ayers wrote: > [ERROR] The specified property 'name' is not of the correct type; found > 'ConfigurationProperty' expecting 'BindingProperty' ModuleDefSchema line 794 is producing a bad error message, that should have included the name of the property, not the

[gwt-contrib] [google-web-toolkit commit] r5193 - Fix error message to include the property name when a binding vs. configuration property ...

2009-04-07 Thread codesite-noreply
Author: b...@google.com Date: Tue Apr 7 10:47:05 2009 New Revision: 5193 Modified: trunk/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/cfg/ModuleDefSchema.java Log: Fix error message to include the property name when a binding vs. configuration property mismatch occurs. Patch by: bobv Review by: jgw (

[gwt-contrib] Re: Error message after ClientBundle/CssResource upgrade

2009-04-07 Thread Eric Ayers
Thanks for the pointers. Changing the set-property to set-configuration-property is working fine now. On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 1:41 PM, BobV wrote: > On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Eric Ayers wrote: > > [ERROR] The specified property 'name' is not of the correct type; found > > 'ConfigurationPr

[gwt-contrib] Re: One last memory review

2009-04-07 Thread Lex Spoon
> 5176: All this does is tweak the debug output of the Java AST.  JSNI methods > have proper indentation in an AST dump now (I was using AST dumps to verify > incremental correctness.) LGTM. > 5177: Fairly self-explanatory; added the state to JReferenceType, but kept > it in JTypeOracle at firs

[gwt-contrib] Re: [google-web-toolkit commit] r5193 - Fix error message to include the property name when a binding vs. configuration property ...

2009-04-07 Thread Bruce Johnson
@Bob: Kudos for fixing this instead of just observing the problem and moving on. You rock for setting this kind of example. On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 1:52 PM, wrote: > > Author: b...@google.com > Date: Tue Apr 7 10:47:05 2009 > New Revision: 5193 > > Modified: >trunk/dev/core/src/com/google/gw

[gwt-contrib] [google-web-toolkit commit] r5194 - Add support for logging response headers, and support multiple headers

2009-04-07 Thread codesite-noreply
Author: j...@google.com Date: Tue Apr 7 12:01:27 2009 New Revision: 5194 Modified: trunk/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/jetty/JettyLauncher.java Log: Add support for logging response headers, and support multiple headers with the same name with Jetty. Patch by: t.broyer Review by: j

[gwt-contrib] Re: JSO patch to use desiredAssertionStatus

2009-04-07 Thread Freeland Abbott
Thus, then. 2009/4/6 Scott Blum > On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:16 AM, Scott Blum wrote: > >> return JavaScriptObject.class.desiredAssertionStatus() ? >> toStringVerbose()? : toStringSimple(); >> > > (typo, obviously) > return JavaScriptObject.class.desiredAssertionStatus() ? toStringVerbose() > :

[gwt-contrib] Re: One last memory review

2009-04-07 Thread Scott Blum
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 4:12 PM, Lex Spoon wrote: > > 5178: Also tightened up the recursive method slightly, and managing the > > "computed" set better. This works because once a class transitions from > > hasClinit -> !hasClinit, there's no possible way it can ever go back. > > Small problem: I

[gwt-contrib] Re: JSO patch to use desiredAssertionStatus

2009-04-07 Thread Scott Blum
One real issue: - I really think toStringVerbose() and toStringSimple() should be private methods. (Making them static and taking the object as a parameter would be less bad also.) We have to be super careful about this particular class because it's so magic. Any instance methods you add effect

[gwt-contrib] Announcing GWT 1.6...and quite a bit more

2009-04-07 Thread Bruce Johnson
Hi Folks! Exciting news today. Rather than attempting to describe everything here, let me point you to some blog posts that hopefully you will find interesting: GWT 1.6 and friends: http://googlewebtoolkit.blogspot.com/2009/04/introducing-gwt-16-and-friends.html Seriously this time, the new lang

[gwt-contrib] Re: review request: clean up the RPC compile-time noise

2009-04-07 Thread Freeland Abbott
On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 2:38 AM, Lex Spoon wrote: > On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Freeland Abbott > wrote: > > There's no special recursion I had to provoke; if you put logging in > instead > > of my short circuit, I think DynaTable reconsiders java.lang.String > > something like 23 times befor