Reviewers: rchandia,
Description:
Let the Key for Maps be of type Object.
[JSR 303 TCK Result] 110 of 257 (42.80%) Pass with 20 Failures and 9
Errors.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1376803/
Affected files:
M user/src/com/google/gwt/validation/client/impl/GwtValid
Reviewers: rchandia,
Description:
Handle custom constraint violation messages.
[JSR 303 TCK Result] 110 of 257 (42.80%) Pass with 20 Failures and 9
Errors.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1379801/
Affected files:
M
user/src/com/google/gwt/validation/client/impl/Co
Reviewers: rchandia,
Description:
PatternValidator matches the whole input string.
[JSR 303 TCK Result] 111 of 257 (43.19%) Pass with 19 Failures and 9
Errors.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1378801/
Affected files:
M
user/src/com/google/gwt/validation/client/con
Reviewers: unnurg,
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1370808/diff/2001/gadgets/src/com/google/gwt/gadgets/linker/GadgetLinker.java
File gadgets/src/com/google/gwt/gadgets/linker/GadgetLinker.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1370808/diff/2001/gadgets/src/com/google/gwt/gadgets
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 9:36 PM, wrote:
> Okay.. so should I submit this? That way, future reviews will be vs.
> trunk.
>
> Maybe I should add a basic unit test to make sure that this at least
> doesn't crash, and maybe even that the output is the same as the web
> mode compiler for some test fil
Okay.. so should I submit this? That way, future reviews will be vs.
trunk.
Maybe I should add a basic unit test to make sure that this at least
doesn't crash, and maybe even that the output is the same as the web
mode compiler for some test file.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1373805/di
LGTM, I have no substantive comments, go forth and code some more.
I was asking myself if the stack approach might increase memory
requirements, but the entire tree must already be in memory, so I
stopped worrying about it.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1373805/diff/6001/dev/core/src/com/
Reviewers: rchandia,
Description:
Fixed validation classifier, added clean plugin to prevent gwt-user from
being deployed to GAE, upgraded to GAE 1.4.2
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1377802/
Affected files:
M samples/expenses/pom.xml
Index: samples/expenses/pom.
I agree with making PUC non-static. This reduces the need to synchronize
on getting instance, etc.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1375802/diff/5002/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/PersistentUnitCache.java
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/PersistentUnitCache.java
(right):
ht
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1369808/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Revision: 9825
Author: fabb...@google.com
Date: Tue Mar 8 08:22:05 2011
Log: Switching to the junit4 jars, although the @annotation stuff isn't
going to work. Also switching to the non-junit4 testng jars, to avoid
classpath order confusion.
Review at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/137
One other thing we should talk about is ditching all of the static-ness.
The static-ness doesn't gel well with CompilationStateBuilder. CSB is
usually a singleton, but you can instantiate an isolated CSB for testing
which has a distinct cache that cannot be interfered with. It seems
like CSB sh
On 5 Mrz., 04:38, Deepak Khosla wrote:
> Hi,
> Is there a way to tell if the checkin
> abovehttp://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=9659made
> it into the latest GWT 2.2?
> We have been having issues with our 'large' application using sencha
> GXT with
> GWT2.1.http://www.s
No, there is no automated acknowledgement, but I just checked and can see
that it got here OK.
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:53 AM, Jens wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I signed the individual CLA through the online form (I think it was last
> friday) and just wondering if there is any response from Google when it
Note also that the GWT programming guide tutorials include an
internationalization section that may be affected.
Stephen.
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 9:26 AM, John Tamplin wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 6:11 AM, T wrote:
>
>> This is just a tiny issue, so I don't want to involve issuetracking.
>>
Hi,
I've fixed an issue in gwt-user but I wasn't able to run the test I wrote.
Running the test in Eclipse as a JUnit test fails and gives me a lot
of com.google.gwt.core.ext.UnableToCompleteException. It tells me to look
for the previous errors but I have so many of
these UnableToCompleteExcepti
Hi,
Is there a way to tell if the checkin above
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=9659 made
it into the latest GWT 2.2?
We have been having issues with our 'large' application using sencha
GXT with GWT2.1.
http://www.sencha.com/forum/showthread.php?118358-Strange-problem-I
Hi,
I signed the individual CLA through the online form (I think it was last
friday) and just wondering if there is any response from Google when its
accepted?
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
On 2011/03/07 16:43:50, jlabanca wrote:
adapted from http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1183801/show
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1371810/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
LGTM
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Reviewers: rjrjr, jlabanca, jat,
Description:
add ie9 user.agent with fallback binding to ie8. (in preparation for ie9
support).
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1369808/
Affected files:
M user/src/com/google/gwt/user/UserAgent.gwt.xml
Index: user/src/com/google/gw
LGTM assuming you verified api-checker and cldr-import work with the new
jars.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1374801/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1374801/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Revision: 9824
Author: gwt.mirror...@gmail.com
Date: Tue Mar 8 09:11:26 2011
Log: property fall back value evaluation scheme - enable fall back bindings.
Review at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1369807
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=9824
Added:
/trunk/user
Pre-existing non-conforming, but yes, they should all use "our" jar.
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:24 PM, wrote:
> LGTM
>
> Why do some of our .classpath entries reference the JUnit jar directly,
> and others reference the Eclipse library JUNIT_CONTAINER?
>
> It seems likely that you need to update t
Revision: 9823
Author: fabb...@google.com
Date: Tue Mar 8 08:59:35 2011
Log: Adding junit-stripped variation of testng, which used to embed junit
http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=9823
Added:
/tools/lib/testng/README
/tools/lib/testng/strip_junit.sh
/tools/lib/testn
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1375802/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/PersistentUnitCache.java
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/PersistentUnitCache.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1375802/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/PersistentUnitCa
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 6:11 AM, T wrote:
> This is just a tiny issue, so I don't want to involve issuetracking.
> I'm dealing with i18n translation, so I decided to generate properties
> from default locale. I've annotated my constants with @Generate as
> provided in:
>
> http://google-web-toolki
Hi,
This is just a tiny issue, so I don't want to involve issuetracking.
I'm dealing with i18n translation, so I decided to generate properties
from default locale. I've annotated my constants with @Generate as
provided in:
http://google-web-toolkit.googlecode.com/svn/javadoc/latest/com/google/gwt
29 matches
Mail list logo
