Tuesday, June 16, 2020

Re: Upgrade to 2.9.0 from 2.8.2 is giving compilation errors while doing GWT compile

None of those classes are included in the default JRE emulation provided in either GWT 2.8.2 or 2.9.0 - if this previously worked, you might have had something on your classpath which provided those sources as supersource, or .gwt.xml files in those packages to indicate that they could be transpiled from some other sources? GWT 2.9.0 did remove one emulated class, NoSuchMethodException, and added several others (partial emulation for ExecutorService, ScheduledExecutorService, Flow), but none of these appear to intersect with the classes you mentioned.

Can you share more specific logs that show this issue?

Also, under GWT 2.8.2, were there warnings that some classes failed to compile, but that the errors were ignored? You can disable this with -strict/-failOnError so that no potential problems like this can go unnoticed.

On Monday, June 15, 2020 at 7:24:35 AM UTC-5, Priya Kolekar wrote:
Hi All,

We are planning to upgrade GWT 2.8.2 to GWT 2.9.0 with java 11 environment,

But while GWT compile,I am getting lot of errors saying "No source code is available for type <CLASS>; did you forget to inherit a required module?" 
Problematic classes include "java.lang.Thread","java.io.InterruptedIOException" ,"org.w3c.dom.Element", "java.util.Properties"

As I understand,errors are raised because these classes are not emulated by GWT  & GWT is unable to find them.
But this was working fine with 2.8.2 version.

Any idea where its going wrong? Are there any specific things to be considered while upgrading to 2.9?

Also, is log4j-gwt.jar compatible with 2.9.0 version?

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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit/668c1985-9937-46de-a6d4-6236e3091074o%40googlegroups.com.

No comments:

Post a Comment