>
>
> @Roberto
> Please note that I am not mixing stuff (java and js objects in the same
> array, or different kind of objects in the same array).
>
> D3 is doing the correct thing here. If you pass an array of something,
> let's say T[] you can expect that you will be getting T and T[] out of D3
Hi and thanks for answering.
I also tend to believe this is not a bug - but - it is definitely in my
wish list.
@Colin jsinterop is certainly kind of fragile but if you bang your head
against it at the end you start understanding the errors. In most cases you
can fix the error by making the java
Oh, the classic array problem! ;)
https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt/issues/9318
IMO as you are wrapping a client lib, and this code is not going to be
shared (used in JRE), so just use elemental2.core.Array. Probably
JsArrayLike is enough as an argument but returning an Array it is easier to
use.
On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Colin Alworth
wrote:
> The example isn't doing instanceof though, it is just making that the
> return type for the method (albeit through the use of generics). Does this
> suggest that we should stop using arrays to refer to raw JS data,
The example isn't doing instanceof though, it is just making that the
return type for the method (albeit through the use of generics). Does
this suggest that we should stop using arrays to refer to raw JS data,
or at least expect that generics may fail in interesting ways around
them (and at
The short answer is that this is also not a bug.
Java arrays are typed, JS arrays are not. So none of the examples you have
will fully work.
E.g. If you do array instanceof Date[] on an array built in JS filled with
Dates it will fail.
A native array is best modeled as SomeNativeJsType[] where
Originally posted in gwt-users.
The question here is the same with the previous one.
Is this considered a bug? Should I report it as an issue? and if so where?
Thanks.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Vassilis Virvilis
Date: Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 2:44 PM