[gwt-contrib] Improvement to HistoryImpl

2012-01-23 Thread ALAA MURAD
Jone, I already did a test project and I replicated the class and modified it, in my test both history token and changed event received the correct token. I know if we can do this fix to ie only, that would have been great. But Jone this a real problem in ie as my empty test project it took 500m

[gwt-contrib] Re: Avoid Java bottleneck by using explicit Charset for byte[]<->String conversions (issue1588803)

2012-01-23 Thread rdayal
LGTM. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1588803/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors

Re: [gwt-contrib] Improvement to HistoryImpl

2012-01-23 Thread John Tamplin
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Aladdin wrote: > This is simply will pass the event to the app for processing, then it > will later change it in the browser. > > > What do you guys think ? That seems likely to break existing code that expects by the time the event is fired the browser has been

[gwt-contrib] Improvement to HistoryImpl

2012-01-23 Thread Aladdin
In IE the History.addItem(...) is very slow, this problem is in the IE only. I tracked the code and I found that the nativeUpdate(historyToken); is were IE take a nape sometimes up to 2000ms if the app is huge. The problem is inside the body of newItem. public final void newItem(String historyT