[gwt-contrib] Re: Request for comments: Really Simple Binding

2010-01-26 Thread Andrew Pietsch
I guess verbosity is somewhat in the eye of the beholder -I would have thought that watermark(myField).withValueOf(anotherField) was pretty concise for a dynamic watermark (c; Pectin came out of developing large scale Swing applications with highly demanding UX/UI requirements (in the banking

[gwt-contrib] Re: Request for comments: Really Simple Binding

2010-01-23 Thread Jon
The biggest problem with pectin, besides its verbosity, is that it appears to be run by a single committer, which is too big a risk to include in an big development project. UiBinder isnt the best solution to declarative UI with GWT (Crux and Kiyaa are arguably better) - but its now the standard

[gwt-contrib] Re: Request for comments: Really Simple Binding

2010-01-22 Thread Jon
Pectin is one of the code based bind frameworks I want to avoid. Despite some nice syntax, you still have to write code like this: binder.bind(model.givenName).to(givenNameField); binder.bind(model.surname).to(surnameField); binder.bind(model.age).to(age); IMHO binding has to be

Re: [gwt-contrib] Re: Request for comments: Really Simple Binding

2010-01-22 Thread Miroslav Pokorny
I can't comment if this already available but it should not be a problem to create annotations that express the binder building expresseions you quoted. Many of the libs you mention are incomplete examples of some of your objectives. Once one declared bindings declaratively ( using