Re: Roadmap Question for GWT 3.0

Both gwt-jackson (https://github.com/nmorel/gwt-jackson/wiki/Type-support) and restygwt (resty-gwt.github.io/documentation/restygwt-user-guide.html) supports polymorphism (and gwt-jackson in addition generics)!

gwt-rpc is nice at the beginning (fast learning curve), but hurts later on - because it's mixes data(-structure) with implementation :-(

Am Montag, 6. Juli 2015 01:26:12 UTC+2 schrieb P.G.Taboada:

I cannot disagree more. Restful, as far as I understand, does not replace gwt-rpc as it does not provide polymorphism. It might be an issue with the current implementations I had a look - can someone tell me some implementation that can handle object graphs and polymorphism as gwt-rpc does?

There are some folks (like me), that stick to the command pattern once introduced by ray in his google io talk. 

I am not giving away batching, caching, versioning of my services that easy...

My code is doing

<A extends Action<R>, R extends Result>
      void execute(A action, AsyncCallback<R> callback);

all over the place. It is a piece of cake for to change the communication layer, as long as I can send Actions through it.

is dagger + ... an alternative to gwt-rpc?

Am Dienstag, 30. Juni 2015 15:44:37 UTC+2 schrieb Ümit Seren:

In addition to what Jens said:
If possible, go Restful. it makes it much easier to later add non-GWT clients and also forces you to think about your domain model as resources (might lead to a clean API).

I guess once Elemental 2.0 is released (AFAIK along the lines with GWT 3.0) you could  either use XMLHttpRequest or fetch (https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2015/03/introduction-to-fetch?hl=en) if you don't mind to use a polyfill for non-supported browser (maybe at that point all the evergreen browsers already support it natively) or use a higher abstraction (like RestyGWT, etc)

On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 at 12:42:51 PM UTC+2, Ed wrote:

@jens

Is there any downside to Request Builder?  Possible deprecation in GWT 3.0?

Best Regards

Ed

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Ed <ej1...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks Jens, Great response, gives our devs something to learn.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Jens <jens.ne...@gmail.com> wrote:

1. GWT.create

<generate-with>: Annotation processors

<replace-with>: Dagger 2.x + AutoFactory (assisted inject) for injection and System.getProperty() to build the Dagger dependency graph based on your deferred binding properties.

For Dagger I created a pull request that generates a dagger-gwt artifact including a GWT module: https://github.com/google/dagger/pull/119

2. RPC

Anything that generates code in a way that is compatible with annotation processors so they can migrate to APT in the future. I guess you need to ask maintainers of your preferred alternatives and hear what they say. Regardless of GWT 3.0 I would never really use GWT-RPC again because things like RPC policy files, "do not use interfaces in serializable types" and that it is hard to consume outside of GWT are annoying.

-- J.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-we...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to google-web-toolkit+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to google-web-toolkit@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.