I found the quote in the online pyjs "book" and I see it refers to the pyjs compiler tool chain itself, not the generated programs:
In 2006, GWT was ported to python, by James Tauber, in a successful > experiment called Pyjamas. The 80,000 or so lines of source code that made > up GWT 1.2 were dramatically reduced to only 8,000, for Pyjamas. > But I did see some encouraging talk about a "dynamic link" option that turns your single pyjs application into a series of relatively independent objects and allows caching for each one independently, which could have an impact on reload times (depending on your browser cache settings). -- Joe B. On Sunday, October 28, 2012 2:30:39 AM UTC-7, Carl wrote: > > I've not read that claim while using Pyjamas. Do you have a reference to > make your money back claim :) > > On 28 Oct 2012, at 09:21, Joe Barnhart <joe.ba...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > > Hi Carl -- > > That is surprising. I don't know much about pyjs or GWT for that matter, > but from what I had read the underlying Python language was so close in > philosophy to Javascript that its "adapter" code was an order of magnitude > smaller than for Java, which has rather large issues of compatibility with > Javascript. One of the core advantages of pyjs was that it was way smaller > than GWT for a given app -- or so the advertisement went! Looks like I'll > have to ask for my money back! > > -- Joe B. > > > On Saturday, October 27, 2012 2:04:11 AM UTC-7, Carl wrote: >> >> thanks for taking the time to reply Joe. >> >> I've written quite a lot of code using Pyjamas and really enjoyed it. >> But the application size grows quickly making support of mobile >> platforms impractical. I switched to GWT (and GWTP) to reduce my >> application size. GWT delivers so many advantages that they offset the >> pain of writing in Java :) I have Web2py and GWT communicating over >> JSON and use GWT Overlays to receive the data on the client side. >> >> Of those written Python server code and GWT client apps, none I've >> come across, are using Web2py. This post was an attempt to track one >> down. >> >> >> >> On 27 October 2012 08:59, Joe Barnhart <joe.ba...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Well, there is the Python equivalent to GWT called Pyjamas (now renamed >> > pyjs). It has been used with web2py successfully. There's even a "how >> to" >> > document in the old FAQ section of the web2py.com site (also >> referenced on >> > the pyjs site). >> > >> > The essential problem with using GWT is that *most* GWT apps use >> Google's >> > homemade RPC to communicate between the browser and the server. That >> RPC is >> > not supported on web2py. You could still use XMLRPC or JSONRPC but you >> have >> > to make that choice explicitly in your GWT app. (I'm no GWT expert so >> this >> > is about as deep as I go.) >> > >> > Joe B. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Friday, October 26, 2012 3:06:38 AM UTC-7, Carl wrote: >> >> >> >> Is anyone using GWT to build clients to work with Web2py server apps? >> >> >> >> I'm copying my GWT WAR directory into my Web2y's server's STATIC >> directory >> >> but what's the best way to manage GWT's CSS file? >> > >> > -- >> > >> > >> > >> > -- > > > > > --
