I'm not advocating that you save up for one large patch at the end. You
should have the code reviewed in increments as you are planning on doing.
All I'm suggesting is that the code not land in trunk/user/... until is
ready. A real branch or bikeshed would be a better place.
On Thu, Mar 18,
Yes. I like your idea. I'll move the development to bikeshed so nobody
thinks this is ready for general consumption. Once the classes are in a
good enough state we will migrate (move) things into GWT proper.
Afterwards, integration of these classes into GWT (aka using them for
interesting things)
Great. When you move them to trunk/bikeshed, please *don't* put them under
the com.google.gwt.bikeshed package. We've concluded that was a mistake and
will be rejiggering it slightly. Your stuff should stay in its real
packages.
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Rodrigo Chandia
You just told me right in time (talking to myself: how was incantation to
revert the last git commit?)
Just to make sure. The classes should go into:
bikeshed/src/com/google/gwt/collections/client/
bikeshed/test/com/google/gwt/collections/client/
Or would it be better to do a new project under
I think bikeshed/{src,test}/com/google/gwt/collections/client/ is just
right.
Be warned, btw, that we have no ant test target in the build.xml there yet.
Patches welcome ;-)
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Rodrigo Chandia rchan...@google.comwrote:
You just told me right in time (talking to
Sure!
2010/3/19 Ray Ryan rj...@google.com
I think bikeshed/{src,test}/com/google/gwt/collections/client/ is just
right.
Be warned, btw, that we have no ant test target in the build.xml there yet.
Patches welcome ;-)
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Rodrigo Chandia
re: package...consider skipping the client convention because it's
meant to be used on the server too. that new form of target-less
naming is part of the design experiment I hope this work can include.
On Friday, March 19, 2010, Rodrigo Chandia rchan...@google.com wrote:
Sure!
2010/3/19 Ray
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
re: package...consider skipping the client convention because it's
meant to be used on the server too. that new form of target-less
naming is part of the design experiment I hope this work can include.
The convention in
I guess we could use a supersource trick to swap in the JS-optimized ones
2010/3/19 John Tamplin j...@google.com
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 4:05 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
re: package...consider skipping the client convention because it's
meant to be used on the server too. that
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Rodrigo Chandia rchan...@google.comwrote:
I guess we could use a supersource trick to swap in the JS-optimized ones
Correct, see RegExp for an example of how this is done.
--
John A. Tamplin
Software Engineer (GWT), Google
--
@John: I was thinking about actually not even designating the package as
shared -- instead just make it a regular-looking Java package. As an
experiment.
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 4:23 PM, John Tamplin j...@google.com wrote:
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Rodrigo Chandia
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Bruce Johnson br...@google.com wrote:
@John: I was thinking about actually not even designating the package as
shared -- instead just make it a regular-looking Java package. As an
experiment.
So if you have the module file in the same directory as the
Reviewers: fabbott,
Description:
Array implementation for Lightweight Collections. Pure Java
implementation only.
This is part of an incremental review. Not likely to land until other
parts are reviewed.
Please review this at http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/232801
Affected files:
A
Not sure if this has been discussed already, but you should consider
developing these in a branch until the landing plan for the changes is
clear.
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 9:50 AM, rchan...@google.com wrote:
Reviewers: fabbott,
Description:
Array implementation for Lightweight Collections.
Sure, discussion and comments are welcome.
I am developing all this in a branch. The idea is to keep reviewing the
changes until we are all satisfied with it. I just thought it made more
sense to publish small changes rather than posting a huge patch for review
at the end. I can do either or
15 matches
Mail list logo
