Google Web Toolkit: December 2016

Saturday, December 31, 2016

Re: GWT 2.8.0 released

Hi all,

I have tried to migrate to 2.8 from 2.7. somehow resolved all the build issues and successfully done. When I deploy my war into weblogic getting folloing error.

I verified gwt-servlet jar is in war\WEB-INF\lib\gwt-servlet-2.8.0.jar

Any idea what might cause this issue ?

appreciate your help.

<Jan 1, 2017 2:32:32 AM EST> <Warning> <HTTP> <BEA-101162> <User defined listener weblogic.wsee.deploy.ServletDeployListener failed: java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/google/gwt/user/client/rpc/RemoteService.

java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/google/gwt/user/client/rpc/RemoteService

at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass1(Native Method)

at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(ClassLoader.java:616)

at java.security.SecureClassLoader.defineClass(SecureClassLoader.java:124)

at weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.defineClass(GenericClassLoader.java:344)

at weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.findLocalClass(GenericClassLoader.java:301)

Truncated. see log file for complete stacktrace

Caused By: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: Class bytes found but defineClass()failed for: 'com.google.gwt.user.client.rpc.RemoteService'

at weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.findClass(GenericClassLoader.java:275)

at weblogic.utils.classloaders.ChangeAwareClassLoader.findClass(ChangeAwareClassLoader.java:56)

at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:303)

at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(ClassLoader.java:248)

at weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.loadClass(GenericClassLoader.java:177)

Truncated. see log file for complete stacktrace

Caused By: java.lang.UnsupportedClassVersionError: com/google/gwt/user/client/rpc/RemoteService : Unsupported major.minor version 51.0

at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass1(Native Method)

at java.lang.ClassLoader.defineClass(ClassLoader.java:616)

at java.security.SecureClassLoader.defineClass(SecureClassLoader.java:124)

at weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.defineClass(GenericClassLoader.java:344)

at weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.findLocalClass(GenericClassLoader.java:301)

Truncated. see log file for complete stacktrace

On Friday, October 21, 2016 at 3:21:41 PM UTC-4, Daniel Kurka wrote:

Hi all,

I am very happy to announce GWT 2.8.0 on behalf of the GWT steering committee and the GWT team at Google.

You can download the release from http://www.gwtproject.org/download.html or from maven central.

The release notes can be found at http://www.gwtproject.org/release-notes.html#Release_Notes_2_8_0

Daniel,
on behalf of the GWT team

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

It's a financial charting library that "aligns" the bars based on the opening time of the exchange. By "aligns" I mean changes the timestamp.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 3:52:02 PM UTC+1, Ignacio Baca Moreno-Torres wrote:

Hehe I'm curious too. What obscure library was modifying your json, and how?

El sáb., 31 dic. 2016 13:37, Vassilis Virvilis <vas...@gmail.com> escribió:
So why it did it in the one case but not in the other? Were you calling the third party js explicitly in the one case?

On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Dave Puchyr <da...@avaritia.com> wrote:
After stepping through the compiled js I found that a third party (obfuscated) js library manipulated the timestamps on me. JsInterop is fine. :) Sorry for the noise.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 11:20:43 AM UTC+1, Dave Puchyr wrote:
Even when I reduce the json input to

{"Contract":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE","action":"onHistoricalData","bar":"D","bars":[{"time":1451952000},{"time":1452038400},{"time":1452124800}],"callback":4,"metadata":{"noData":false},"t":1483179318,"t0":1452075258,"ticker":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"}

the time properties are still 1607400000 in the JsInterop parsed object. Thanks for the suggestion, though.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 8:40:58 AM UTC+1, Paul Robinson wrote:
Have you tried modifying/simplifying the JSON to see what your odd behaviour is sensitive to?

Paul

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Vassilis Virvilis

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

Hehe I'm curious too. What obscure library was modifying your json, and how?

El sáb., 31 dic. 2016 13:37, Vassilis Virvilis <vasvir2@gmail.com> escribió:

So why it did it in the one case but not in the other? Were you calling the third party js explicitly in the one case?

On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Dave Puchyr <dave@avaritia.com> wrote:
After stepping through the compiled js I found that a third party (obfuscated) js library manipulated the timestamps on me. JsInterop is fine. :) Sorry for the noise.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 11:20:43 AM UTC+1, Dave Puchyr wrote:
Even when I reduce the json input to

{"Contract":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE","action":"onHistoricalData","bar":"D","bars":[{"time":1451952000},{"time":1452038400},{"time":1452124800}],"callback":4,"metadata":{"noData":false},"t":1483179318,"t0":1452075258,"ticker":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"}

the time properties are still 1607400000 in the JsInterop parsed object. Thanks for the suggestion, though.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 8:40:58 AM UTC+1, Paul Robinson wrote:
Have you tried modifying/simplifying the JSON to see what your odd behaviour is sensitive to?

Paul

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Vassilis Virvilis

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

The 3rd party code was being called implicitly when I fired the message on the event bus.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 1:37:29 PM UTC+1, Vassilis Virvilis wrote:

So why it did it in the one case but not in the other? Were you calling the third party js explicitly in the one case?

On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Dave Puchyr <da...@avaritia.com> wrote:
After stepping through the compiled js I found that a third party (obfuscated) js library manipulated the timestamps on me. JsInterop is fine. :) Sorry for the noise.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 11:20:43 AM UTC+1, Dave Puchyr wrote:
Even when I reduce the json input to

{"Contract":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE","action":"onHistoricalData","bar":"D","bars":[{"time":1451952000},{"time":1452038400},{"time":1452124800}],"callback":4,"metadata":{"noData":false},"t":1483179318,"t0":1452075258,"ticker":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"}

the time properties are still 1607400000 in the JsInterop parsed object. Thanks for the suggestion, though.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 8:40:58 AM UTC+1, Paul Robinson wrote:
Have you tried modifying/simplifying the JSON to see what your odd behaviour is sensitive to?

Paul

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
Vassilis Virvilis

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

So why it did it in the one case but not in the other? Were you calling the third party js explicitly in the one case?

On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Dave Puchyr <dave@avaritia.com> wrote:

After stepping through the compiled js I found that a third party (obfuscated) js library manipulated the timestamps on me. JsInterop is fine. :) Sorry for the noise.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 11:20:43 AM UTC+1, Dave Puchyr wrote:
Even when I reduce the json input to

{"Contract":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE","action":"onHistoricalData","bar":"D","bars":[{"time":1451952000},{"time":1452038400},{"time":1452124800}],"callback":4,"metadata":{"noData":false},"t":1483179318,"t0":1452075258,"ticker":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"}

the time properties are still 1607400000 in the JsInterop parsed object. Thanks for the suggestion, though.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 8:40:58 AM UTC+1, Paul Robinson wrote:
Have you tried modifying/simplifying the JSON to see what your odd behaviour is sensitive to?

Paul

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Vassilis Virvilis

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

After stepping through the compiled js I found that a third party (obfuscated) js library manipulated the timestamps on me. JsInterop is fine. :) Sorry for the noise.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 11:20:43 AM UTC+1, Dave Puchyr wrote:

Even when I reduce the json input to

{"Contract":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE","action":"onHistoricalData","bar":"D","bars":[{"time":1451952000},{"time":1452038400},{"time":1452124800}],"callback":4,"metadata":{"noData":false},"t":1483179318,"t0":1452075258,"ticker":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"}

the time properties are still 1607400000 in the JsInterop parsed object. Thanks for the suggestion, though.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 8:40:58 AM UTC+1, Paul Robinson wrote:
Have you tried modifying/simplifying the JSON to see what your odd behaviour is sensitive to?

Paul

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

Even when I reduce the json input to

{"Contract":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE","action":"onHistoricalData","bar":"D","bars":[{"time":1451952000},{"time":1452038400},{"time":1452124800}],"callback":4,"metadata":{"noData":false},"t":1483179318,"t0":1452075258,"ticker":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"}

the time properties are still 1607400000 in the JsInterop parsed object. Thanks for the suggestion, though.

On Saturday, December 31, 2016 at 8:40:58 AM UTC+1, Paul Robinson wrote:

Have you tried modifying/simplifying the JSON to see what your odd behaviour is sensitive to?

Paul

Friday, December 30, 2016

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

Have you tried modifying/simplifying the JSON to see what your odd behaviour is sensitive to?

Paul

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

Thanks

On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 12:12:56 AM UTC+1, Dave Puchyr wrote:

Parsing the following JSON input and sending the resulting object to the console yields the expected results for a JSNI JSON.parse() but yields incorrect timestamps using a JsInterop JSON.parse() (with correct results for all other properties). I'm completely at a loss as to why. Any suggestions?

Input:

{"Contract":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE","action":"onHistoricalData","bar":"D","bars":[{"close":21.76,"high":21.84,"low":21.38,"open":21.41,"time":1451520000,"volume":3067},{"close":21.56,"high":21.63,"low":21.14,"open":21.37,"time":1451865600,"volume":2565},{"close":21.49,"high":21.57,"low":21.26,"open":21.5,"time":1451952000,"volume":2303}],"callback":4,"metadata":{"noData":false},"t":1482867635,"t0":1451763575,"ticker":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"}

JSNI JSON parser:

native static Object parse( String json ) /*-{ return $wnd.JSON.parse( json ); }-*/;

JsInterop JSON parser:

@JsType( isNative = true, namespace = GLOBAL, name = "JSON" ) abstract public class JSON { native static public <T> T parse( String json ); }

@JsType( isNative = true, namespace = JsPackage.GLOBAL, name = "Object" ) public class Message { public int callback; // HARD-CODED in conjunction with Service::CALLBACK }

// json from WebSocket Window.console.info( parse( json ) ); Message message = JSON.parse( json ); Window.console.debug( message );

console.info:
Object
Contract:"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"
action:"onHistoricalData"
bar:"D"
bars:Array[3]
0:Object
close:21.76
high:21.84
low:21.38
open:21.41
time:1451520000
volume:3067
__proto__:Object
1:Object
close:21.56
high:21.63
low:21.14
open:21.37
time:1451865600
volume:2565
__proto__:Object
2:Object
close:21.49
high:21.57
low:21.26
open:21.5
time:1451952000
volume:2303
__proto__:Object
length:3
__proto__:Array[0]
callback:4
metadata:Object
noData:false
__proto__:Object
t:1482867635
t0:1451763575
ticker:"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"
__proto__:Object

console.debug:
Object
Contract:"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"
action:"onHistoricalData"
bar:"D"
bars:Array[3]
0:Object
close:21.76
high:21.84
low:21.38
open:21.41
time:1607400000
volume:3067
__proto__:Object
1:Object
close:21.56
high:21.63
low:21.14
open:21.37
time:1607400000
volume:2565
__proto__:Object
2:Object
close:21.49
high:21.57
low:21.26
open:21.5
time:1607400000
volume:2303
__proto__:Object
length:3
__proto__:Array[0]
callback:4
metadata:Object
noData:false
__proto__:Object
t:1482867635
t0:1451763575
ticker:"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"
__proto__:Object

I tested the code in Chrome, Edge, and Safari and each yielded the same results. Any suggestion as to where things are going awry will be greatly appreciated.

Dave

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

Can I do anything more than setting the GWT compile output style to DETAILED to investigate further?

No. And I would recommend using PRETTY instead of DETAILED, as PRETTY is way more readable. But I would be surprised if you find any notable difference between JSNI and JsInterop that could cause the browser's native JSON.parse() method to return different results using the same input.

In my example the JS basically looks the same.

-- J.

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

Thanks a lot for taking a look. Indeed, like you, when I created a simple test case I couldn't reproduce the error. However, I can assure you that the problem is not with the server since I'm parsing the same json string on the client side with both JSNI and JsInterop and getting the incorrect result from JsInterop. Can I do anything more than setting the GWT compile output style to DETAILED to investigate further?

On Friday, December 30, 2016 at 4:58:27 PM UTC+1, Jens wrote:

Just tried it and both JSNI and JsInterop work as expected. Given that in your broken example all timestamps are the same, I guess your server or some other code has a bug and it only accidentally occurred while you were testing JsInterop.

-- J.

Re: JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

Just tried it and both JSNI and JsInterop work as expected. Given that in your broken example all timestamps are the same, I guess your server or some other code has a bug and it only accidentally occurred while you were testing JsInterop.

-- J.

Re: Is there still a visual designer for GWT .

GWT itself does not provide a visual designer. If the old GWT designer hasn't been updated to work with current GWT and Eclipse then I guess the answer is no.

-- J.

Compiler requests

On mobile so can't develop as much as I'd want.

1. Have a look at how JUnitShell synthesizes the .JUnit modules.
2. gwt.xml files are on the way out, once GWT will have adopted J2CL. This will take time though. The reasons for those files are source/super-source/public paths and deferred binding.
3. You should be able to configure the ResourceOracle for that ; have a look at how the CodeServer handles its -src arguments

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Users" 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 https://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Thursday, December 29, 2016

View raw image data and string question

Hi,

- String question:

I'm newbie and i'm little surprise aboud String (java) and hashcode .....

If I understand right, on each create string, created a hashcode ? (true ?)( but I need this only for equal-method ?)

mostly I don't need hashcode !

In web using very often String, for Images and Text and and ....why don't use char[] or byte[] ?

If I transfer 100kb String Image .... I think this create hashcode, take a much performance ? (or not ?)

What is on the client side, (I don't known javascript ) GWT translated to similar objects with hashcode ?

what is the best way ? ( today )

for keywords or links I'm very happy !

- View Raw Image question:

I have my Images (jpg) in database in raw format and transfer this over websocket (binary) ....now How I can performant show It ?

I see already solution with convert to Base64 ...and decompress it (jpg) but this is not direct way ? ( take much unnecessary performance....)

what is the best way ? ( today with html5)

for keywords or links I'm very happy !

BR Marian

Is there still a visual designer for GWT .

hi all

just checking , is there still a visual desinger available. as per from Eclipse, seems then window builder is not supporting GWT anymore.

please help.

Xav

Compiler requests

Hi all,

I'm switching my code base from TeaVM to GWT+elemental for better Java8 support. It works fine, woehoe! Big thanks to GWT. Nice to be back, I've worked professionally with GWT in 2010, unfortunately I haven't done any GWT projects since.

However I ran the TeaVM compiler programmatically, and I don't succeed running the GWT compiler like that. Now I create a Bladiebla.gwt.xml file, run a process, delete the ..gwt.xml: works but is somewhat cumbersome. I can't create a ModuleDef for my module:

     <module rename-to='a'><inherits name='elemental.Elemental'/><entry-point class='" + className + "'/><source path=''/></module>

    ModuleDef module = new ModuleDef("a");
    // ?? module.addInherits??("elemental.Elemental"); // how to do this?
    module.addEntryPointTypeName(className);
    module.addResourcePath(""); // correct?


On a side-note: there are probably a 1000 reasons I don't know which are the reason for these .gwt.xml files. but I do prefer the TeaVM approach, where I only have to point out my entrypoint, and that's all, it only compiles whatever code was called. No client/shared/server packages, @GwtIgnore or .gwt.xml files. Might be something to consider, because I guess it's faster to leave out never used classes and methods in the first place. And more beautiful, although that's my opinion.

And now that I'm complaining: I'm missing a plane 'here is the source-folder' argument for the compiler. Now I manually add src/main/java to the existing classpath programatically, works fine, but then again this might later be a reason why I can't succeed in a programmatical approach, even if I simulate the ModuleDef correctly.

Super thanks!
Niels Gorisse

Tuesday, December 27, 2016

Errai + MVP

Hi,

I am working on migrating parts of an existing GWTP app to Errai.

While the UI part of Errai looks pretty impressive (html templating), I want to keep the MVP aspects of the app for better modularity.

Does anyone has experience implementing MVP with Errai. I know I can go the vanilla GWT way, but that calls for a lot of boilerplate.

Thanks!

JsInterop JSON.parse()ed object differs from JSNI JSON.parse()ed object

Parsing the following JSON input and sending the resulting object to the console yields the expected results for a JSNI JSON.parse() but yields incorrect timestamps using a JsInterop JSON.parse() (with correct results for all other properties). I'm completely at a loss as to why. Any suggestions?

Input:

{"Contract":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE","action":"onHistoricalData","bar":"D","bars":[{"close":21.76,"high":21.84,"low":21.38,"open":21.41,"time":1451520000,"volume":3067},{"close":21.56,"high":21.63,"low":21.14,"open":21.37,"time":1451865600,"volume":2565},{"close":21.49,"high":21.57,"low":21.26,"open":21.5,"time":1451952000,"volume":2303}],"callback":4,"metadata":{"noData":false},"t":1482867635,"t0":1451763575,"ticker":"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"}

JSNI JSON parser:

native static Object parse( String json ) /*-{ return $wnd.JSON.parse( json ); }-*/;

JsInterop JSON parser:

@JsType( isNative = true, namespace = GLOBAL, name = "JSON" )
abstract public class JSON {
   native static public <T> T parse( String json );
}

@JsType( isNative = true, namespace = JsPackage.GLOBAL, name = "Object" )
public class Message {
   public int callback; // HARD-CODED in conjunction with Service::CALLBACK
}

// json from WebSocket
Window.console.info( parse( json ) );
Message message = JSON.parse( json );
Window.console.debug( message );

console.info:

Object

Contract:"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"
action:"onHistoricalData"
bar:"D"
bars:Array[3]

0:Object

close:21.76
high:21.84
low:21.38
open:21.41
time:1451520000
volume:3067
__proto__:Object

1:Object

close:21.56
high:21.63
low:21.14
open:21.37
time:1451865600
volume:2565
__proto__:Object

2:Object

close:21.49
high:21.57
low:21.26
open:21.5
time:1451952000
volume:2303
__proto__:Object

length:3
__proto__:Array[0]

callback:4
metadata:Object

noData:false
__proto__:Object

t:1482867635
t0:1451763575
ticker:"STK:USD:PBA@NYSE"
__proto__:Object

console.debug:

1. Object

I tested the code in Chrome, Edge, and Safari and each yielded the same results. Any suggestion as to where things are going awry will be greatly appreciated.

Dave