[gwt-contrib] Re: Code Review: gwt-google-apis Maps issue 170 - InfoWindow should be Overlay subclass

2008-09-18 Thread Eric Ayers
committed as r802. On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Miguel Méndez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > LGTM - Just like we realized while discussing this change, you'll need to > extend Overlay.createPeer to instantiate the other built-in overlay types. > That will make ensure that the java type for ove

[gwt-contrib] Re: Code Review: gwt-google-apis Maps issue 170 - InfoWindow should be Overlay subclass

2008-09-18 Thread Miguel Méndez
LGTM - Just like we realized while discussing this change, you'll need to extend Overlay.createPeer to instantiate the other built-in overlay types. That will make ensure that the java type for overlay types is always correct which may make the isXXX methods unnecessary (or you could have them ret

[gwt-contrib] Re: Code Review: gwt-google-apis Maps issue 170 - InfoWindow should be Overlay subclass

2008-09-18 Thread Eric Ayers
Sorry, the previous patch left out an update to Marker.java. Updated patch vs. r800. On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:24 AM, Eric Ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Miguel, > > These are all good suggestions, especially the one about including all of > the source code. I've updated the patch. > > >

[gwt-contrib] Re: Code Review: gwt-google-apis Maps issue 170 - InfoWindow should be Overlay subclass

2008-09-18 Thread Eric Ayers
Hi Miguel, These are all good suggestions, especially the one about including all of the source code. I've updated the patch. On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:48 AM, Miguel Méndez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Should InfoWindow be included in this patch? > Shouldn't the Overlay.createPeer method perform

[gwt-contrib] Re: Code Review: gwt-google-apis Maps issue 170 - InfoWindow should be Overlay subclass

2008-09-18 Thread Miguel Méndez
Should InfoWindow be included in this patch? Shouldn't the Overlay.createPeer method perform the tests on the JavaScriptObject and return the correct concrete wrapper class? On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Eric Ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Miguel, > > I would like you to review the a