On Jul 26, 5:56 pm, John Tamplin <j...@google.com> wrote: > > Well, we do know there will be other linkers, and if there aren't extension > points defined they will be done via cut-and-paste, which is what led to the > current state we are in. > > -- > John A. Tamplin > Software Engineer (GWT), Google
The proposal looks great and I really look forward to the new linker. I haven't been able to look at this for several months, so I might be a little off, but one problem I've had would be solvable by being able to pass a key/value artifact to the linker and have the pair be accessible at runtime. Specifically, I was compiling modules into single web worker scripts in a pre-linker, then doing a kind of lame search-and-replace to insert the cacheable "strong" names of the worker files into all the CompilationResults. SpeedTracer gets around this (I believe, it's been a while since I looked) by loading another selection script which then loads the actual worker script; I was trying to avoid loading the extra file. Obviously the particulars of such a system and getting it to play nicely with user-created primary linkers is in no way trivial. -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
