The author of that library has plans to migrate to overlay types.
We've got a change branch going on
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-google-apis under changes/vinays/.
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-google-apis/source/browse/#svn/changes/vinays/gwt-google-maps-v3
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 10:08 PM,
Oh, and I meant to say that your contributions are welcome!
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Eric Ayers zun...@google.com wrote:
The author of that library has plans to migrate to overlay types.
We've got a change branch going on
http://code.google.com/p/gwt-google-apis under changes/vinays/.
ping...
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/154810/show
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Thanks Eric, Vinay.
Which project would you prefer I contributed the code to? So far I've I've
been working with a clone of the repo at gwt-google-maps-v3, but I'm happy
to switch to using the gwt-google-apis branch if that will help with
migration and API stability.
On 7 July 2010 21:50, Vinay
Reviewers: jat,
Description:
Allow RPC for unmodificable collections
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/620805/show
Affected files:
M user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/rpc/core/java/util/Collections.java
M
In March 2010 Matt Mastracci reported problems with the Avira
heuristics misdetecting GWT-generated files as Crypted/Gen malware:
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit-contributors/browse_thread/thread/cb7ce70ff8af204/f257d2e0f93ba039
Avira has reacted and modified their heuristics.
Daniel, I guess it would make sense for you to contribute code at
gwt-google-apis vinays branch.
Plan is to convert the existing JSIO dependent code to Overlay types and
write test cases for the same. You may also opt to write missing types from
JS API using Overlay types. Let me know what you
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/620805/diff/1/2
File
user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/rpc/core/java/util/Collections.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/620805/diff/1/2#newcode135
user/src/com/google/gwt/user/client/rpc/core/java/util/Collections.java:135:
/**
So how does
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/669801/show
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Reviewers: Lex, tobyr,
Description:
The main purpose of this change is to remove the impedance mismatch
between our constructor argument order, and the argument order for JSNI
::new() invocations. Our constructors put the synthetic this args after
user args, JSNI ::new() puts the args before
Hi Vinay,
That sounds good. I'll probably start with converting some of the code using
JSIO to use overlay types, because that's what I'm using for my current
project. Regarding testing, it seems that the tests used in the
gwt-google-apis Maps v2 API use the gwt-google-apis
AjaxLoader
There are reports of success loading the v3 API with the AJAX Loader
(aka Common Loader). The AjaxLoader Java support is API agnostic.
You should be able to provide the same parameters to
AjaxLoader.loadApi() as described in the forum post below:
Reviewers: Lex, tobyr,
Description:
Follow-on to http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/675801/show
This patch removes the extra hop through a synthetic static 'new'
function that is currently used for implementing JSNI ::new()
invocations.
In the 99% case, the JsInvocation is replaced with a
Thanks for the suggestions. I like the script tag injector idea. I'm
currently using AjaxLoader in to load the v2 API when the user navigates to
the page with the map in it. I did try the using AjaxLoader.loadApi() to get
the Maps v3 API (using the same params described in the forum post you
14 matches
Mail list logo
