/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5577
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Mark Renouf mark.ren...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm just writing to let everyone know I got this working. I was initially
worried that Extesions/WebApps would not have access to the GWT DevMode
plugin, but since Flash
On 2011/01/27 22:07:25, pdr wrote:
Are you planning on adding events?
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1318803/show
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
Aha. That's exactly what I ran into recently, regarding my attempts to use
DevMode inside a Chrome Extension (see my recent post).
Glad to hear it's been spotted and considered a bug in Chromium.
http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=72407#c10
--
Hi all,
I'm just writing to let everyone know I got this working. I was initially
worried that Extesions/WebApps would not have access to the GWT DevMode
plugin, but since Flash is supported I realized that this should work.
It turns out there's just a few gotchas in making it work. The
I've developed gwt-html5-media, which implements all the common
functionality described in the Media Element section of the HTML5
spec, including the specific functionality for Video and Audio tags,
including all of the events and settings. I could use some help
testing and improving it and
-...
On 11/17/09, Mark Renouf mark.ren...@gmail.com wrote:
All I get is a dialog box Google Installer / Unknown Installer
Error
Windows XP SP3, IE7, VMware
Screenshot:
http://google-web-toolkit-contributors.googlegroups.com/web/Screensho...
--
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web
On Jun 5, 12:49 pm, Piotr Jaroszyński p.jaroszyn...@gmail.com wrote:
One thing that I think would be nice to do is to look at the HTML 5 cross
site xhr implementations and use them where available and only fallback to
this solution on older browsers.
This would be a nice approach, especially
Wow, I like it! This isn't as crazy as it sounds. After just watching
the V8 talk from I/O, I've learned the JavaScript library is
implemented in JavaScript (preloaded in a heap snapshot).
The efficiency level they are hitting now makes this seem like a very
sensible approach, especially for
So, you may be planning this but I haven't seen it mentioned yet...
If you can ship all the browser plugins within the single distro, but
also host them through the server in the java side when running GWT
apps, Then, when a browser requests a page which requires OOPHM and
they don't have it,
Wanted to check here before creating a ticket. Here's the basic
sitation:
I took liberties with the names, but the structure is basically
unchanged :-)
public class MagicContextT extends HasMagic? {
T magical;
}
class Magical {
MagicContext context = createContext();
void
to
go.
ORM objects just don't make good decoupled wire objects. I think what we
need to do is provide tooling to make the inevitable DRY violations as
mechanical and painless as possible.
rjrjr
2009/6/1 Mark Renouf mark.ren...@gmail.com
Glad to see progress on this. Ray, did anything
Oh... man. Cancel that!
Y'know it certainly felt like like of those oh darn, I've been
editing the wrong file all along moments, and it was... ugh.
Sorry for the noise, pilot error indeed.
On Jun 4, 6:36 pm, Mark Renouf mark.ren...@gmail.com wrote:
Wanted to check here before creating
Glad to see progress on this. Ray, did anything come out of
discussions at Google I/O?
There seems to be two schools of thought here (both equally valid
approaches mind you):
1. Help the client participate in the persistence, maintain detached
state, dirty field lists, etc. This seems lofty and
Got bit by this the other day. This is my current workaround for
Comparable, since without it, a dynamicCast is called for each test
(like in a map, using natural odering where a K must be cast to a
ComparableK). I use it in tight loops where the dynamicCast overhead
would kill performance (+20%
14 matches
Mail list logo
