LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1793803/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Reviewers: cromwellian,
Description:
Fix TreeMap and TreeSet emulation tests to pass with JDK 7.
No changes to prod mode. In JavaScript, we will keep the somewhat more
lax
behavior of JDK 6. Developers moving to JDK 7 who rely on the JDK 6
TreeMap/TreeSet behavior will see new exceptions in dev
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1792803/diff/1/plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h
File plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1792803/diff/1/plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h#newcode55
plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h:55: static void finalize(JSFreeOp* fop,
JSObject* obj);
I'd like to get the untested tests into the test suite, but not if
they're broken or hanging. It sounds like a separate CL to me.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1786803/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1792803/diff/1/plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h
File plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1792803/diff/1/plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h#newcode55
plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h:55: static void finalize(JSFreeOp* fop,
JSObject* obj);
On 201
On 2012/07/24 23:19:54, cromwellian wrote:
I don't understand why the dual flags, but I would not make it a
proper
compiler flag because there are some static clinit inits in compiler
classes that need to know whether coverage is enabled when the classes
are
loaded.
I was thinking it would
I don't understand why the dual flags, but I would not make it a proper
compiler flag because there are some static clinit inits in compiler
classes that need to know whether coverage is enabled when the classes are
loaded.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 4:13 PM, wrote:
>
> http://gwt-code-reviews.**
On 2012/07/24 23:13:32, skybrian wrote:
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1786805/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1786805/diff/1/dev/c
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1786805/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1786805/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/JavaToJavaSc
Thanks Alan.
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1792803/diff/1/plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h
File plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1792803/diff/1/plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h#newcode55
plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h:55: static void finalize(JSFreeOp* fop,
JSObjec
Reviewers: skybrian,
Description:
Firefox 14 DevMode Plugin
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1792803/
Affected files:
M plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.cpp
M plugins/xpcom/JavaObject.h
M plugins/xpcom/Makefile
A plugins/xpcom/VisualStudio/ff130-xpcom.vcproj
A plugin
Reviewers: cromwellian, skybrian,
Description:
Introduce a flag that explicitly turns coverage on/off (default off).
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1786805/
Affected files:
M dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/jjs/JavaToJavaScriptCompiler.java
Index: dev/core/src/co
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1749803/diff/12001/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/ProgressLogger.java
File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/ProgressLogger.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1749803/diff/12001/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/javac/ProgressLog
LGTM
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1789803/diff/2004/user/src/com/google/gwt/validation/rebind/GwtSpecificValidatorCreator.java
File
user/src/com/google/gwt/validation/rebind/GwtSpecificValidatorCreator.java
(right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1789803/diff/2004/user/src/com/googl
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1789803/
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
I tried running the tests, but they appeared to hang. I also realized
that I actually need to get access to the FileList and Files of the
HTML5 File API. So maybe it pays to abandon this, as you suggested, and
instead access the Element myself. What do you think?
If I do indeed abandon this, shou
On 2012/07/23 18:56:03, manolo.carrasco wrote:
Agree, we should not introduce breaking changes.
Actually people were forced in 2.4 to use both versions (gwt and
bindering)
unless they use deprecated methods (Places), and using mvp+gin is a
pain.
Not at all!
Use web.bindery everywhere (abso
17 matches
Mail list logo
