On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Miroslav Pokorny <
miroslav.poko...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The main hurdle remains that the compiler works on source and not
> bytecode, was there not a plan to change this sometime in the future.
>
> If it worked on bytecode one could use any language as it would n
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Joel Webber wrote:
> I think any interested party ought to be able to try the decompiler route
> and see what happens. God knows how weird it might look, but I see no
> obvious reason that it shouldn't work. Takers?
Are there any free decompilers that do fully c
2009/10/1 Maxime Lévesque
> Has there ever been discussions about supporting scala ?
>
There have been some water cooler discussions about it, but it seemed like
there were too many tasks left to do to make Java-based GWT everything we
want it to be to undertake such a project.
People have used
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Sami Jaber wrote:
> In fact, I meant keeping the actual code as a normal developer would have
> to write manually.
> Most of them will likely provide a kind of generic Async implementation. If
> one is able to find the right split point, all the call sites would b
On Thu, Oct 1, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Sami Jaber wrote:
> I was wondering why wouldn't it be possible to automatically create the
> split point based on the information provided by the AST and Compilation
> Analysis
> We know precisely where the code cost JS size and where are the call sites
> for
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Ray Ryan wrote:
> Does MS1 need this patch? (Hint: no.)
>
It is possible that MS1 would need a similar patch for Swing when running
-notHeadless, but I would be ok shipping it without it.
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google
--~--~-~--~--
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 7:25 PM, wrote:
> John, this seems awfully complicated, and a lot of that complixity is in
> support of big public API that as far as I can see is unused.
>
> Is all of this really necessary for us to tell that 2.0.0-rc < 2.0.0, or
> whatever convention it was that we sett
Committed at r6215.
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:22 PM, Amit Manjhi wrote:
> LGTM. Why use a TreeMap in RemoteObjectTable?
I basically kept the same thing that Bob had there before, just moved it
from ThreadLocals to an isolated synchronized class. I don't see any reason
it needs to be ordered, so I will change it
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Daniel Rice (דניאל רייס)
wrote:
> O.K., I'll stick with the one-line version for non-Mac platforms.
Another option might be to point at a Wiki page that we could update with
recipes for different platforms over time.
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT)
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Daniel Rice (דניאל רייס)
wrote:
> You say "more generic" but your comment seems to be suggesting greater
> specificity ("use" versus ""). Do you have some language in
> mind?
>
I am suggesting that either we make the language more generic, such as "You
need to us
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Daniel Rice (דניאל רייס)
wrote:
> I think this turned out not to be necessary:
> 1) The script uses the gwt install path to decide whether to generate the
> mac stuff
> 2) Because the ant script now uses , it no longer differs
> between platforms;
> only the Eclips
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Ray Ryan wrote:
> Time to put it up on rietveld again? Or is there already an url?
Same one is still there - http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56807/show
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Rajeev Dayal wrote:
> Could we modify the hosted mode servlet so that it set the appropriate
> no-cache headers on hosted.html? I've also run into this issue due to
> browser caching.
> Also, is this file re-generated every time hosted mode is started up? If
> not
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Ray Ryan wrote:
> Where does the error message live? This seems like the perfect time to make
> it a bit more helpful, even if it just suggests to people that they check
> for both browser and server caching.
>
HostedHtmlVersion.validHostedHtmlVersion
--
John A
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Sripathi Krishnan <
sripathi.krish...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Also, I read a few days ago that the GWT team were working on a HtmlUnit
> based testing methodology, and I was not sure if the above approach would
> become useless once that got released.
>
HtmlUnit will
LGTM
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 3:11 AM, Richard Vowles wrote:
> Am I to understand from this that someone else (other than me) has
> implemented a OOPHM client for HtmlUnit?
>
Yes, that is what we are working on to be the default testing mechanism in
GWT 2.0.
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT)
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Kelly Norton wrote:
> This is committed @r6144.
To trunk, or the 1.7 branch? Dan needs to merge it into 1.7 if isn't there,
and presumably it needs to wind up in trunk as well.
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google
--~--~-~--~~--
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 2:11 AM, George Georgovassilis <
g.georgovassi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was under the impression that IsSerializable had been deprecated de
> facto. John, does IsSerializable currently override the serialization
> policy or this this a proposed behavior?
>
It doesn't overr
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 9:06 AM, nicolas de loof wrote:
> I wonder that IsSerializable is still in trunk without a depreaction
> annotation. java.io.Serializable is supported by GWT-RPC since few major
> versions, maybe it's time to remove such legacy marker interface.
>
I don't know if this is su
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Ed wrote:
> I think it would be possible if you use a kind of delayed-pipeline
> (pattern): holding on to an event till some condition is met before
> forwarding itExample of the condition: till a maximum delay time
> is reached and/or the focus of the previous
On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 11:12 AM, wrote:
> What conditions trigger this?
>
> Also, is it possible that somebody is relying on this. For example, what
> happens if you use a link to change the hash from outside a GWT app,
> assuming that the GWT app will catch it?
>
I don't use IE except when test
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
> As is our team custom, I'd like unanimous signoff (or FHMP) from the GWT
> team on this new API, as well as any and all feedback from the larger
> community.
LGTM.
I suggest more writeup about the issues with other entrypoints, such as
thir
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Freeland Abbott wrote:
> Is the TIMING log level a good idea, though, and sorted correctly? I
> waffled a bit on whether to make it be a new log level or an orthogonal
> flag
I'm not sure it makes sense as a log level -- I think perhaps a separate
flag to tr
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Freeland Abbott wrote:
> That's a drag... I hadn't noticed any instances where the main log and
> child were interleaved (do we bother to differentiate which parallel child
> logs are being used, in such a case??
I'm not positive what you are asking, but the UI d
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:21 AM, wrote:
> Also, each TreeLogger branch is automatically timed, from start to when
> we can figure the branch is dead (i.e. to first log emission NOT on the
> branch, a slightly too exapansive definition.)
>
That isn't going to work in general -- frequently a branch
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Cameron Braid wrote:
> JBoss use a naming scheme that sorts alphabetically, maybe it is worth
> considering
>
> http://www.jboss.org/jbossas/downloads/
>
> Applied to the names in the original email
>
> 1) gwt-2.0.0-m1.zip
> 2) gwt-2.0.0-m2.zip
> 3) gwt-2.0.0-rc1.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:50 PM, brett.wooldridge <
brett.wooldri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There are however, various errors building the Safari plugin in XCode
> which I am unable to untangle. If a Mac-head there could take a peek,
> that would be cool -- I'll be more than happy to build and test
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 5:32 AM, brett.wooldridge <
brett.wooldri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> While we're on the topic, what is the state of the truck with respect
> to OOPHM and Safari? I'm running off the trunk from about a month ago
> (and it's usable), but I've seen lots of OOPHM related changes g
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Sanjiv Jivan wrote:
> For the immediate future I was more thinking about the possibility of
> IntelliJ adding support for JSNI debugging with the current OOPHM
> implementation. IntelliJ's remote Javascript debugging works with FF only
> (via their plugin) and the
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Sanjiv Jivan wrote:
> Thanks for the information. Support for shared memory transport would
> be great. Is this feature on the roadmap, or is it still on the
> drawing board?
>
Sam Gross did a proof-of-concept implementation last year, and the current
wire protoc
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Sanjiv Jivan wrote:
> I've only recently started working with OOPHM and it looks great. I
> observed that the performance / responsiveness when running the
> SmartGWT showcase with OOPHM seems to be much better (and close to web
> mode) with OOPHM compared to the G
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Sanjiv Jivan wrote:
> I'm pretty certain I tried oophm-xpcom-ff35.xpi and oophm-xpcom-
> ff3+.xpi from trunk with FF 3.5.2 but neither was able to talk to the
> server and complained about a missing plugin. So I tried installing
> oophm-xpcom-ff3.xpi and it was abl
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Sanjiv Jivan wrote:
> I'm running OOPHM using a trunk build and the FF 3.5 plugin. I'm
> getting a bunch of JSNI warnings like
>
> [WARN] JSNI method '__defineStatic' returned a value of type boolean
> but was declared void; it should not have returned a value at a
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Sami Jaber wrote:
> I would like to have a look at JavaScriptObject$ class which is used for
> the overlay types.
> This class is generated by the HostedModeClassRewriter with ASM routines
> ...
> As .gwt-tmp has been removed, the new generated hosted mode classes
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Scott Blum wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
>
>> Senator Blum,
>>
>> Do you mean "disturbing" as in
>> 1) revolting,
>> 2) distressing, or
>> 3) disordering?
>>
>
> Distressing, I think.
>
> -- Example #1 --
>
> Please sort the follo
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 7:46 AM, Nathan Wells wrote:
> I've been experimenting with GWT.isClient() and GWT.isScript(), but to
> no avail. Thus far I've only tried it in hosted mode with 1.7... is
> there something I'm missing?
>
isClient/isScript isn't going to let you include non-translatable c
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
> The version update notification thing is admittedly a problem, and so it's
> true we maybe would need to tweak that. Not changing code most certaily
> wasn't the justification for the naming scheme I proposed (slap me the day I
> let that be
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
> Senator Blum,
>
> Do you mean "disturbing" as in
> 1) revolting,
> 2) distressing, or
> 3) disordering?
>
> It seems that mathematics has successfully survived similar notational
> issues, such as the whole X vs. X' thing.
>
I dislike the f
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 8:22 PM, Fred Sauer wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the issue. If you have different versions of
>> hosted.html and GWT, things are likely to not work and that is why that
>> check was added in 1.6. I don't see how you could have the incorrect
>> contents of hosted.ht
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Fred Sauer wrote:
> When switching GWT versions on my project I get this error (when I'm
> lucky):
>
> *[ERROR] Invalid version number "2.0" passed to external.gwtOnLoad(),
> expected "1.6"; your hosted mode bootstrap file may be out of date; if you
> are using -n
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:26 AM, wrote:
> On 2009/08/10 23:10:02, jat wrote:
>
>> I also renamed the write* methods based on your earlier feedback.
>>
>
> Minor nit, but is it really appropriate to call this a 'tab' key? It
> seems like more of a "window" key, by which I mean "browser window,
> w
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 10:26 AM, John LaBanca wrote:
> I believe the problem is that if you extend ValueChangeEvent and
> ValueChangeHandler, you can then call
> Widget#addHandler(mySubValueChangeHandler, ValueChangeEvent.getType()),
> creating a mismatch because you are associating a SubValueCh
On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 6:23 PM, wrote:
> What are the OOPHM-related goals for MS1?
1. change the UI to coalesce the tabs related to a single application
(including multiple reloads of the same app, and multiple modules on the
same page), showing dropdowns to let you select the particul
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:32 AM, Sam Gross wrote:
> > I agree with jsautocfg64.h, but the others look platform-independent. Do
> > having them there cause problems for the Mac build?
>
> In gecko-1.9.1:
> The prcpucfg.h file differs between platforms. The version in
> gecko-1.9.1/include causes
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 4:46 PM, wrote:
> LGTM, but we should probably get a thumbs-up from at least one other
> interested person.
>
> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/56807
>
Suggestion of that person?
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google
--~--~-~--~~
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 2:50 PM, George Georgovassilis <
g.georgovassi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This occurred to me also when I started cutting down the requests: you
> cannot do the initial selection on the server as HTTP proxies will
> then see only one permutation: the first one that is ever ret
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Arthur Kalmenson wrote:
> I don't think firebug counts the initial request to fetch the host
> page, so two requests. One for the nocache.js and another for the
> cachable HTML. With the inlining of the nocache.js file, you could get
> it down to 0 requests if the
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Arthur Kalmenson wrote:
> I'd love to see this in the trunk too. We have only 2 round trips on
> start up now, thanks to ClientBundle. Getting it down to one will be
> very slick!
Are you counting fetching the host HTML page? With this approach, the
selection scr
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Benjamin Lerman
> wrote:
> When 2 permutations are very close to one another (a lot of deferred
> binding will lead to the same implementation for the 2 permutations),
> dynamic selection through indirection might not be that costly in
> performance. There is also
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:51 AM, George Georgovassilis <
g.georgovassi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'd like to save first time visitors that roundtrip to fetch
> nocache.js. Instead I've declared the module HTML page as non-
> cacheable (works nice thanks to E-Tag) and moved images and GWT-
> compiler
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Joel Webber wrote:
> Please do have a look and see what might be done to make this easier. The
> names are definitely the most negotiable part of the design, and I'm
> definitely open to other ways of handling the "RootLayoutPanel" problem. The
> biggest issue I ha
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Joel Webber wrote:
> If we want to support IE6 fully (which I hate having to do, but it's hard
> to argue with the fact that it still account for ~20% of the market,
> depending upon whose stats you use), then I think this is basically the only
> approach that will
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Stephen wrote:
> I'm sure an official version will appear soon, but in the meantime
> I've made a build of the XPCOM OOPHM plugin which seems to work on
> FF3.5.2/Win (and also contains untested libs for FF3.5 on Linux 32-
> bit) - it's at:
>
> http://www.aisper.c
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Sven Brunken wrote:
> Dropping transparency support in IE6 is a bad idea. Too many business
> people just still use IE6. Also saying that developers that need
> transparent images in IE6 should not use ImageBundle is that good.
> When writing my app I don’t want t
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:02 AM, David wrote:
> If the compiler could however detect if transparency is needed than
> the whole DirectX filter could be avoided. But in reality, we use
> transparency all over the place. Most of the transparency is just
> binary so a GIF would be capable of handlin
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Joel Webber wrote:
> I fully support the idea of fixing this issue one way or another, and I'm
> pretty strongly in favor of providing an efficient-if-not-pretty
> implementation on IE6 (which I believe is what you're proposing as well).
>
> There are two separate
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Sam Gross wrote:
> A gecko-sdks/gecko-1.9.1/Darwin-gcc3/bin/xpidl
>
This file appears to be just i386 (at least according to the Linux file
command) -- does it need to be a universal binary or do we need to provide
a way of running an architecture-dependent
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Sam Gross wrote:
> (1)
>
> Here's a patch that adds gecko-1.9.1 for Mac and libxpcomglue_s.a for
> gecko-1.8 and gecko-1.9.0. I also included some files that are needed
> for the executable_path in gecko 1.9.0.
>
> http://web.mit.edu/sgross/www/gwt/gecko-sdks-darw
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Ray Ryan wrote:
> I share your concern, Amir, but I'm even more afraid of a) providing an ill
> considered API for custom parsers and b) delaying 2.0. I'm pretty confident
> we can limp along without them for a dot release.
You could move it into an impl package
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Daniel Rice (דניאל רייס) wrote:
> What sort of opt-in mechanisms do you have in mind?
Since this is running on the server, couldn't you clone it and do the add
test there? It might be slow if it is large, but that is better than not
working at all.
--
John A.
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Joel Webber wrote:
> I've been wanting to do this since we first introduced the dom package in
> 1.5. The plan is to remove all extant references to user.Element and
> friends, as well as the DOM.* static methods, at which point they can be
> deprecated. I'd like t
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 9:51 AM, mescali...@gmail.com
wrote:
> so I did I.
> I repeated the above steps today.
> ant (1.7.1) run up to some point, then I get this error:
>
> [gwt.javac] Compiling 725 source files to
> /home/federico/gwt-trunk/trunk/build/out/dev/core/bin
> [gwt.javac]
>
> /home/fe
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 4:37 PM, Fushion wrote:
> Same problem here.
>
The problem is that it needs an IE8 deferred binding, and that is present in
incubator svn (in GlassPanel.gwt.xml). If you can't build incubator from
svn, you can duplicate the ie6 line and change it to ie8 in the
GlassPanel.
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Aaron Steele wrote:
> I'm having a strange problem with trunk (r5690) where the OOPHM Swing
> UI is freezing on Mac OS X 10.5.7 with the Safari 4 plugin.
>
> The easiest way to reproduce the problem:
>
> 1) Compile trunk (via `ant build`) with 32-bit Java 1.5
> 2)
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 11:38 PM, brett.wooldridge <
brett.wooldri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> John, know any reason the new hosted mode on OS X would be trying to
> launch firefox? Safari is my default OS browser, and Eclipse is
> configured to use the system default browser. But the new hosted mode
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:12 PM, eighty wrote:
>
> I'm having a strange issue with trunk (r5687, compiled with 32-bit
> Java 1.5) where hosted mode (launched from Eclipse 3.4 with 32-bit
> Java 1.5 via the Google Plugin) won't start on Mac OS X 10.5.7 (Intel
> Core 2 Duo 64-bit machine) with Safar
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 6:14 PM, wrote:
> 2. Change the regexps to be word-neutral, so that they
> don't care about the language of the tags, just the
> shape of the values. This trades a language
> sensitivity for a positional one.
>
Note that some locales may reorder where the
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 5:05 PM, wrote:
> We (and just about everyone else) officially dropped support for Safari
> 2 some time ago. It was uncontroversial when discussed on gwt-contrib.
Ok -- Eric misinformed me about still running the Safari2 tests.
In that case, we should remove its associat
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Bob Vawter wrote:
> > append: where is quoting the RPC_SEPARATOR_CHAR handled if it is
> contained
> > within the string?
>
> That's unnecessary, since the length of the string is known. The
> following separator character is just there to ensure that the decoder
>
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Sebastien wrote:
> I compiled with success by commenting the lines 230-231 in the ./
> common.ant.xml Ant file. Indeed the call to svinfo task failed (I do
> not know why). Now, it works !
>
My guess is it was confused by the French output of svn info.
--
John
Sorry this took so long -- its a lot of code. In general it looks pretty
good - mostly just minor nits and a couple clarifications requested, plus
one potentially significant issue.
I would like to see example payloads in comments (not sure the best place to
put it -- maybe in the CommandSink imp
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 5:12 AM, dflorey wrote:
> It would be very cool if you could post a wiki page / posting how to
> build OOPHM for Firefox 3.5 from trunk (branch?).
>
I think we have nearly reached agreement on how things will go (trunk/plugin
would contain the plugin source and prebuilt b
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Lex Spoon wrote:
> I've been trying to think of ways to speed up the -soyc option, and
> here is the result of one attempt. What do people think?
>
> The idea is to mimick some aspects of the speedy symbolMaps files.
> Instead of using the enhanced SourceInfo's t
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 8:57 AM, Andrés Testi wrote:
> Since serialization is a way to freeze an object tree for further
> consumption, such mechanism could be used to inject instances from
> generators to generated code. For example, being Foo serializable, and
> having an InstancePool in Generat
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:34 PM, Ben Chambers wrote:
> I think that may be some of the problem. I'm using 64-bit linux.
> I'll try switching to the 32-bit JDK and upping the memory limit.
>
GWT tests require legacy hosted mode, which requires a 32-bit JVM
currently. You should have gotten an e
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Lex Spoon wrote:
> Overall, unless I missed something, it's down to style and taste. I'd
> pick 1, then 4, then 6. Ian has indicated preferring 6, then 4, then
> 1. I presume Cameron prefers 4 over anything else. Shall we go with
> 4, then, everyone?
>
> // pr
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Freeland Abbott wrote:
> I like the general idea, yes.
>
> A complication is that one of the changes John asked for, specific for the
> i18n provider, was to return */*-FALLBACK-*/ || "default"*, with the idea
> that a null/undefined fallback should be gracefully
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Evan Adams wrote:
> The problem is that it "flattens" the query parameter space. Consider the
> case where one of the query params is a continue url that has it's own
> params. They will be encoded and this distinguishes the original-URI's
> params from the cont
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Evan Adams wrote:
> I considered this approach when responding in the bug report but ended up
> rejecting it.
>
> The problem is that it "flattens" the query parameter space. Consider the
> case where one of the query params is a continue url that has it's own
>
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:57 AM, wrote:
> None of [g w t . h o s t e d] are in the list of reserved characters
> from rfc3986:
> reserved= gen-delims / sub-delims
> gen-delims = ":" / "/" / "?" / "#" / "[" / "]" / "@"
> sub-delims = "!" / "$" / "&" / "'" / "(" / ")" / "*" / "+" / "," /
On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 7:37 PM, uwfrog wrote:
>
> Maybe I was so out-of-date that I just tried out the OOPHM this
> weekend... I had the hosted mode launched successfully from eclipse,
> but I had a problem installing firefox plugin which became a show
> stopper. Here is what I did.
>
> 1. downl
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Scott Blum wrote:
> Instant hosted mode should really change the game, right? We will no
> longer be speculatively compiling anything for TypeOracle since we'll be
> using class files that should already exist.
The problem is that if there is no class file, we
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote:
> We've known for a while that the GWT compiler is spammy, even at default
> log levels. There is a reason for this behavior, believe it or not:
> TypeOracle's JClassType#getSubtypes() call. Because generators can ask for
> the subtypes of an
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Freeland Abbott wrote:
> LGTM; I'll submit it shortly.
Don't you need try/finally to make sure it is cleaned up in the event of an
exception?
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
http://group
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
> On 11 juin, 16:11, John Tamplin wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Joel Webber wrote:
> > > +1 Ray. Now here's the really tricky question. Is there any way we can
> take
> > > adv
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Joel Webber wrote:
> +1 Ray. Now here's the really tricky question. Is there any way we can take
> advantage of Javascript's "for (x in y) { ... }" syntax (and should we,
> given its spotty performance)? My intuition tells me that the only way we
> could use it wo
On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Stefan Haustein wrote:
> I'd like to submit a patch (see below) that changes "JsArray JavaScriptObject>" to "JsArray"
>
> Motivation:
> Support more lightweight code in places where we depend on Javascript
> anyway.
> In particular, I would like to remove the depe
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 6:39 PM, Sam Gross wrote:
> The makefile in oophm-plugins-trunk references tools/gecko-sdks, but
> that directory isn't in the SVN repo. Is there a plan to put it in
> tools? It would be nice if we all used the same gecko sdks. I
> assembled a version of 1.9.1 gecko sdk
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 12:38 PM, Matt Mastracci wrote:
> BTW, one advantage of this XPCOM version is that it would work on both
> FF 3.0 and 3.5. The current OOPHM XPI fails on 3.5, as the Moz devs
> changed some of the JS type constants. JSVAL_VOID (the effective
> internal signature of the "un
2009/6/7 Piotr Jaroszyński
> Can't you emulate sync calls with async calls in js? Locking would be
> best but can't you always retract to busy looping?
>
You would then get constant slow script warnings.
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google
--~--~-~--~~~-
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
> On 7 juin, 02:24, Mark Renouf wrote:
> > If the WebSocket
> > standard ever materializes, it could be even better (and standards
> > based), and act as a last-resort fallback on all platforms.
>
> WebSocket is all about async communications
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 1:21 PM, Scott Blum wrote:
> This would definitely be a good thing to look into, but I expect it's
> slightly tricky. Maybe the library code itself could be hacked on until a
> suitable formulation was found.
Since the JRE requires returning the values (a very bad idea I
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Daniel Rice (דניאל רייס)
wrote:
> In this case, the code is the GWT compiler itself, so it doesn't get
> translated ot JavaScript.
>
Right, he was talking about the related problem in user code, and it seems
like there we can do better than HotSpot.
--
John A.
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:15 AM, TazmanianD wrote:
>
> There is an additional benefit to this optimization that goes beyond
> speeding up the compiler. It should produce faster Javascript as
> well. Unless I'm mistaken, using an iterator to iterate over a list
> requires the creation of a Javas
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Daniel Rice (דניאל רייס) wrote:
> The difference is more pronounced when iterating over small
> collections many times, since a new Iterator object must be
> instantiated for each iteration. The compiler seems to handle a lot
> of smallish collections.
>
In fact m
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Scott Blum wrote:
> One thing we could do: without necessarily modifying gwt.jar right this
> second, we could just manually reorder the existing rules such that we list
> files known to be newer first. Then if we really care, we could update a
> custom ant task l
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Eric Ayers wrote:
> What I mean to do is create a getter, deprecate the constant and clean up
> all references we control. But like I said, last time there was debate over
> which class should 'own' the version number.
>
About seems a fine place for it. Perhaps
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Eric Ayers wrote:
> Last time we discussed this section of code, there was talk of moving the
> version number elsewhere, but that was pre OOPHM. Discussion?
>
> (previous thread)
>
> https://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/browse_thread/t
301 - 400 of 670 matches
Mail list logo
