GWT 1.5 Milestone 2 now available for download

181 views
Skip to first unread message

Bruce Johnson

unread,
Apr 7, 2008, 11:23:00 PM4/7/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi again everybody,

GWT 1.5 Milestone 2 (build 0.0.2415) is now available:


If you haven't already, please take a look at the notes for Milestone 1 (linked below) for some background information on changes coming in GWT 1.5:


It bears repeating that for milestone builds like this, there are still many known problems, and it is use-at-your-own-risk. It *definitely* isn't ready for production use. For example, this milestone build is missing release notes, and it doesn't include the developer guide documentation. Please expect that it will require some trial and error getting everything to work.

What's new in Milestone 2? Here are some highlights:

- There is a new DOM API package. Using the new ability to subclass JavaScriptObject, GWT 1.5 M2 includes bindings for nearly the entire W3C HTML DOM spec. See the javadoc for the package com.google.gwt.dom.client for details. The widgets will be retrofitted to use the new DOM classes in the upcoming release candidate.

- Some widgets now have animation effects. Popups, trees, etc. have subtle animation effects to provide visual cues when hidden and shown.

- The addition of a "Showcase" sample. This sample combines features from several other samples and demonstrates the new, nicer-looking GWT default stylesheet and widget animations. Note that the default style is still in flux and is likely to change.

- Keyboard support has been added where previously absent in UI classes, including in menus and tab panels.

- ARIA support for enhanced accessibility is now present in most widgets, including menus, trees, tabs, and button variants.

- Bi-di. Widgets and panels have built-in support for bi-directional layout.

- "long" emulation. The Java language defines "long" types to be 64-bit signed integers, whereas JavaScript only supports 64-bit floating point numbers, which cannot accurately represent the same whole-number range as a true "long" type. GWT 1.5 M2 transparently emulates long types properly to more faithfully maintain Java semantics in web mode.

- There is a single Mac OS X distribution that works on both Leopard (10.5) and Tiger (10.4).

Now, some known bugs and caveats:

- Change from Milestone 1: No more "std/" directory in the compiler output. The GWT compiler output directory structure has been reverted to match its behavior in GWT 1.4. If auxiliary linker output is generated, additional files are placed in a sibling subdirectory whose name is "<module>-aux/". In most existing projects, this output directory won't be created, so the behavior should match GWT 1.4.

- The DOM structure for some widgets has changed to accommodate new CSS styling options. See the CSS rules used in GWT-default.css and Showcase.css (both in the Showcase project) for examples of how to use the new styles.

- Not all widgets work perfectly in standards mode. There are several minor known layout bugs that still need to be fixed for the release candidate.

- "long" and JSNI. The new long emulation support adds a new prohibition against the accidental use of "long" types within JSNI code. If you experience this error, the hosted mode tree logger will provide a "More Info" link that you can double-click for details on how to resolve the issue.

We really hope you'll try it out, and we 're eager to see what you think so far. Please report bugs in the issue tracker<http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/entry>, and discuss it in the contributors forum<http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors>.

Enjoy!

-- Bruce, on behalf of the GWT team

-- 
Join us at Google's biggest developer event of the year
May 28-29, San Francisco
http://code.google.com/events/io

Ian Bambury

unread,
Apr 7, 2008, 11:28:09 PM4/7/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com
Fantastic effort guys! Feel proud!

kozura

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 1:21:09 AM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Thanks for posting these milestones for testing, especially the
Java1.5 support is well appreciated!

Not really issues, but from M1 to M2 for my project:
- The compiler (and shell) now runs out of heap space with the Java
default, during rebind to particular browsers
- The size of the browser-specific cache files has jumped 15%, from
~185k to ~210k. There was little change from 1.4.60 to M1

Just curious if these are expected

jk

rusty

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 1:32:30 AM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Excellent work, go GWT team!

I just switched our project over. Initial impressions are very good.
Nice work with integrating animation into it as well. I like the new
showcase example as well, but I wonder if the stack panel wouldn't
work better as a slide than that weird fade thing it does?

Output files are about the same size as Milestone 1, however compile
time has increased a bit. Our project which used to take about 45
seconds to build now takes 1m20. Not sure if that's specifically
something to do with our project or whether it will be a general
thing? I'm sure you've crammed all sorts of goodness into it, but
anything you can do to tune that compile time would be awesome!

overall very good!

Rusty

On Apr 8, 12:28 pm, "Ian Bambury" <ianbamb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fantastic effort guys! Feel proud!

rusty

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 2:12:18 AM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Just one other thing I noticed, it also breaks the LightBox widget
from gwt-widgets, which is one I rely on fairly heavily. Basically
only about half of the screen is greyed out by the PNG image they use.
I might have to look into that one a bit more, as it was working fine
under M1.

Rusty

rusty

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 3:17:47 AM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Sorry for the triple post but it seems to be related to GWT not
stretching the background popup panel past 640 wide? The height gets
stretched fine but the width stops after 640.

Any ideas? It's just a simple call to PopupPanel.setSize(width,
height)?

So you call PopupPanel.setSize(900, 600) and you get a PopupPanel that
is a 640x900?

Luciano Broussal

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 7:56:55 AM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi all,

Congratulations

Luciano
--
http://www.gwtwindowmanager.org

Joel Webber

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 8:24:22 AM4/8/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com
Rusty,

I can think of no good reason that a popup would be limited in size like that. One possibility is that it might be related to standards vs. quirks fixes, but that's just a guess. I'm checkout out gwt-widgets right now to see what's going on.

Thanks for the heads-up,
joel.

Joel Webber

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 9:31:29 AM4/8/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com
I just checked out the gwt-widget source, and set up a quick sample app that looks like this (not sure if this is the intended use pattern, but it looked like it):

    PopupPanel pp = new PopupPanel();

    pp.add(new Button("w00t!"));


    LightBox lb = new LightBox(pp);

    lb.show();


This seems to do more or less the right thing on IE6, FF3, and Safari3, and Opera9. The gray area overflowed the client boundaries a little bit on IE and Safari, but that was about it. Could you show me an example that is pegging the popup size?

Thanks,
joel.

Toby Reyelts

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 9:54:19 AM4/8/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 1:32 AM, rusty <rusty...@gmail.com> wrote:

Excellent work, go GWT team!

Output files are about the same size as Milestone 1, however compile
time has increased a bit. Our project which used to take about 45
seconds to build now takes 1m20. Not sure if that's specifically
something to do with our project or whether it will be a general
thing? I'm sure you've crammed all sorts of goodness into it, but
anything you can do to tune that compile time would be awesome!

Rusty (and others),

Can you ensure that you're not getting a lot of warnings output to the console, for example, about deprecated metadata usage like gwt.typeArgs? We've seen several other people encounter slowness due to large amounts of logging. For example, running with -logLevel DEBUG can have a huge impact on the amount of time it takes to compile, launch hosted mode, and refresh.
 

Fred Sauer

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 9:58:16 AM4/8/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com
If you need a quick fix, you might try the GlassPanel from the incubator:
  http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit-incubator/wiki/GlassPanel

HTH
Fred
--
Fred Sauer
fr...@allen-sauer.com

Ria1234

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 10:37:27 AM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
How do I generate cross site version of the application using
Milestone 2.
The set-linker tag isn't supported anymore, I was able to figure out a
new add-linker tag, but it does not produce any output.
Any clues anyone ?



On Apr 8, 6:54 pm, "Toby Reyelts" <to...@google.com> wrote:

Matt

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 10:52:19 AM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Having not followed GWT's release schedule before, is there any idea
when the final release is scheduled for? A month? Three months?
About how many milestones do you have before a final release?


Thanks for all your hard work!

On Apr 7, 11:23 pm, "Bruce Johnson" <br...@google.com> wrote:
> Hi again everybody,
> GWT 1.5 Milestone 2 (build 0.0.2415) is now available:
>
> http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/downloads/list?can=4&q=ve...
>
> If you haven't already, please take a look at the notes for Milestone 1
> (linked below) for some background information on changes coming in GWT 1.5:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit/browse_thread/threa...

Tim T

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 11:38:32 AM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Any way compillation step could parallelized to reduce the time it
takes? It's a real pain watching compiler taking only 1 cpu/core time
on my 4 core dev box and more than a minute to build a gwt
project...and what if my box had 8 cores? Or maybe somehow structure
the compilation to exclude classes/packages that haven't changed in
the java source?


On Apr 8, 9:54 am, "Toby Reyelts" <to...@google.com> wrote:

Sebastien

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 11:39:38 AM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi,

I am trying to migrate from GWT 1.5 M1 to the M2. During the
compilation step, I have the following kinds of errors :
[GWTCompiler] [ERROR] Errors in 'jar:file:/home/sebastien/workspace/
prism/lib/main/gwtext/gwtext.jar!/com/gwtext/client/util/
DateUtil.java'
[GWTCompiler] [ERROR] Line 116: Referencing method
'com.gwtext.client.util.DateUtil.getTime': return type 'long' is not
safe to access in JSNI code
[GWTCompiler] [ERROR] Line 132: Parameter 1 of method
'com.gwtext.client.util.DateUtil.create': type 'long' may not be
passed out of JSNI code
...
It seems the GWT-EXT library (0.9.3) uses 'long' type. Is it mean that
JSNI code using the 'long' type cannot be used with 1.5M2 version ?

As there is a big gap between gwtext 0.9.3 and gwt 2.x (API
changes ...), both migrations are a huge work for me ...

regards,
Seb

On 8 avr, 05:23, "Bruce Johnson" <br...@google.com> wrote:
> Hi again everybody,
> GWT 1.5 Milestone 2 (build 0.0.2415) is now available:
>
> http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/downloads/list?can=4&q=ve...
>
> If you haven't already, please take a look at the notes for Milestone 1
> (linked below) for some background information on changes coming in GWT 1.5:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit/browse_thread/threa...

Freeland Abbott

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 11:51:15 AM4/8/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com
The several discussion threads on this are at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/search?group=Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors&q=long+emulation&qt_g=Search+this+group,
but the most cogent of them is probably http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/browse_thread/thread/603f3c35369debcf/e134139d95682976?lnk=gst&q=long+emulation#e134139d95682976, and particularly John Tamplin's summary:

We had a face-to-face meeting today to nail down this issue, and here is
what we came up with (rationale in italics):
   1. All longs in Java code will be emulated
   *Existing Java code expects longs to just work, and some of that code
   can't readily be changed (in libraries or shared server code).  If the user
   cares about performance and a double was suitable before, they can change it
   to use doubles instead.*
   2. long parameters to a JSNI method will result in an error
   instructing you to use either double or Long.  Also, the compiler will
   continue its current behavior, which is to pass an emulated long object to
   JSNI, if a to-be-specified annotation is present on the long parameter.
   This would be used for generated RPC serializers and internal uses, but
   would also be available to users if they need it (but only documented where
   the details are explained).
*Code that used to work correctly in GWT 1.4 can just change the type
  to double and it will work exactly as it did before (other than the
  conversion from the emulated long to double added by the implicit cast).
  JSNI code that just passes around a token can use Long equally well, and
  code that really needs access to the emulated long can use the
  low-visibility annotation to enable it.  Developers converting apps from
  1.4 to 1.5 will already have lots of warnings to deal with, and a
  warning about passing long might get lost in the pile of warnings, while the
  code may no longer work correctly at all.  Better to force the developer to
  choose which use case they want up front and get known behavior than to risk
  silently bad behavior discovered at runtime.*
   3. Since a large portion of the code we are worried about long
   performance on deals with timestamps, we would provide a GWT-specific way to
   get timestamps and deltas in a double.
*For example, animation code typically does long math on timestamps,
   which will be significantly slower in 1.5.*

(Amusingly, in digging that up, I also came across a Feb 5, 2008 prediction from Ian that real longs would be unavailable for a "long, long" time... I think he expected more than two months!

Ria1234

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 12:08:27 PM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Any one has idea about the add-linker tag
I tried "xs" but go no additional output from the compiler ..



On Apr 8, 8:51 pm, "Freeland Abbott" <gwt.team.fabb...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> The several discussion threads on this are athttp://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/search...
> ,
> but the most cogent of them is probablyhttp://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors/browse...,
> from Ian<http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit/browse_thread/threa...>that
> real longs would be unavailable for a "long, long" time... I think he
> expected more than two months!
>

Sanjiv Jivan

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 1:21:25 PM4/8/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com
Sebastien,
I'll be putting up a build of gwt-ext that supports GWT 1.5 M1 in a couple of days. In the meantime please use GWT 1.4.

You can find updates on the gwt-ext forum : http://www.gwt-ext.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=760

Thanks,
Sanjiv

rakesh wagh

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 4:29:43 PM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Thanks for the new release. Here are my 2c from the first look:
- Menu animation looks funny. It should not be part of the default
behavior. I think menus looked good without the animation. Is there a
flag to turn off the animations?
- Disclosure panel animation was much required and the panel now looks
complete with that effect.
- Tree animation looks great! Wish you had added lines in the tree.
Many users have asked for that. It gives the tree a rigid look.
- popup and dialog animations: Correct me if I am wrong, but I guess
the window rectangle zooms out from the center of the screen(correct
me if i am wrong here). It would be nice if these rectangle could zoom
out of a specified widget(example the button that is clicked).
Moreover it would be nice if you could provide a example that will
fade the background when a "Dialog" is displayed.

- Request: Can you implement animation for stackpanel tabs??
- Request: Double click to expand 100% for the horizontal and vertical
splitpanel?

Thanks and Congrats for this milestone.

rusty

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 7:25:45 PM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
@Joel - I'm using a pre-built version, so maybe there's something
different in the source. I might try switching to the GlassPanel in
the incubator anyway, as that seems to be more supported (I haven't
seen an update to the gwt-widgets library in a long time)

@Toby - I saw all the warnings on my first compile, but I have fixed
them all, it made a slight difference to the build time, but the ones
I reported were for the fixed version already. Also I've noticed that
the compiler is inspecting classes that I don't even use (out of third
party GWT library files) - is this expected behaviour? I noticed this
initially when GWT was complaining about components of the gwt-widget
library, so I just removed these files from the jar.

Rusty
On Apr 8, 10:54 pm, "Toby Reyelts" <to...@google.com> wrote:

rusty

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 10:51:32 PM4/8/08
to Google Web Toolkit
@Joel: I've switched to GlassPanel and all is well now. Seems like
it's a better implementation anyway. I also figured out my width
problem. It's that in this milestone the Dialog Box & PopupPanel is
much more configurable (which is good) on of the style names used in
it clashed with our existing CSS though (which had a width of 660px).
This is our fault though, because we had a blanket div.content which
picked up .gwt-DialogBox .middleCenter .content as well. So put that
one down to my stupidity and don't worry about looking into it.

@Toby I forgot to mention I'm running the debugger at WARN level with
output OBF, and no warnings appear. Upping it to ERROR doesn't seem to
make any difference to the compile times. My theory is that the
compiler is now looking through every single class in all of my
inherited modules even if I don't actually use those classes? Or
perhaps it has always done that, but it now does something extra as
well? I'm guessing this because when I was getting warnings, it was in
classes I wasn't even using anywhere.

Rusty

Sebastien

unread,
Apr 9, 2008, 4:23:38 AM4/9/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi Sanjiv,

You wanted to say "gwt-ext that supports GWT 1.5 M2" ?
Because I already use GWT 1.5 M1 and gwt-ext 0.9.3 without problem.

Thanks for you work again !!

Seb

On 8 avr, 19:21, "Sanjiv Jivan" <sanjiv.ji...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sebastien,
> I'll be putting up a build of gwt-ext that supports GWT 1.5 M1 in a couple
> of days. In the meantime please use GWT 1.4.
>
> You can find updates on the gwt-ext forum :http://www.gwt-ext.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=760
>
> Thanks,
> Sanjiv
>

Andrej

unread,
Apr 9, 2008, 8:27:41 AM4/9/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi,

I vote for reverting PopupPanel 3x3 table implementation.
What's the reason of this change? (rounded corners are possible with
1.4 PopupPanel implementation...)



Joel Webber

unread,
Apr 9, 2008, 8:39:40 AM4/9/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com
I'll let JohnL answer this in more detail, but my understanding is that only limited styling is possible without the 9-box structure. I believe things like adding drop-shadows and borders (other than a simple, solid color), while still retaining the ability to resize, are nigh impossible without table cells. Would that all browsers actually implemented the full CSS border image styles like WebKit does...

If this structure's breaking your code in a way that's difficult to work around, please let us know exactly how it is doing so. I'm not entirely averse to reverting it if it causes hard-to-fix problems -- but we're trying to walk a fine line here. If we leave the structure the way it was, lots of styles become difficult and/or impossible. We've heard over and over again that people want all the beautiful styling that they see in some other libraries, and we're trying to provide it without breaking everyone.

joel.

Andrej

unread,
Apr 9, 2008, 10:50:28 AM4/9/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi,

I suggest to create DecoratorPopupPanel (or similar name) with 3x3
table rendering, and
revert PopupPanel from 1.4.
There are many situations where we don't need to style PopupPanel at
all
for example it is just single TextBox container.

I will try to publish example of our application using Desktop window
manager.

thanks.
Andrej


On Apr 9, 2:39 pm, "Joel Webber" <j...@google.com> wrote:
> I'll let JohnL answer this in more detail, but my understanding is that only
> limited styling is possible without the 9-box structure. I believe things
> like adding drop-shadows and borders (other than a simple, solid color),
> while still retaining the ability to resize, are nigh impossible without
> table cells. Would that all browsers actually implemented the full CSS
> border image styles like WebKit does...
> If this structure's breaking your code in a way that's difficult to work
> around, please let us know exactly how it is doing so. I'm not entirely
> averse to reverting it if it causes hard-to-fix problems -- but we're trying
> to walk a fine line here. If we leave the structure the way it was, lots of
> styles become difficult and/or impossible. We've heard over and over again
> that people want all the beautiful styling that they see in some other
> libraries, and we're trying to provide it without breaking everyone.
>
> joel.
>

Joe Cole

unread,
Apr 9, 2008, 9:24:17 PM4/9/08
to Google Web Toolkit
+1

We use popuppanel for all table data editing in our application.
It would make sense to have a generic 3x3 table for general rounded/
shadow styling purposes, and override the existing popup panels widget
to provide for cases where you need to style the popup. Is it possible
to have both options?

Thanks,
Joe

alex

unread,
Apr 10, 2008, 8:20:05 AM4/10/08
to Google Web Toolkit
wow~

Joel Webber

unread,
Apr 10, 2008, 8:31:52 AM4/10/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com, John LaBanca
That's at least a couple of votes for separating PopupPanel and "DecoratedPopopPanel" (or some such name).

@jlabanca: Is this feasible within the constraints of the styling you're trying to achieve? Can you think of any problems this might cause?

Sebastian

unread,
Apr 10, 2008, 1:26:23 PM4/10/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Like Rakesh said, some of the new animations are questionable. I would
strongly suggest to switch them off as the default.
For all the rest... congratulations!

Sam Halliday

unread,
Apr 10, 2008, 6:08:30 PM4/10/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Excellent! It's working for me on OS X Leopard if I use Java 5. I'm
now going to port my (non-critical) code to use the new language
features because it seems stable enough for my plaything app.

One thing that I have immediately noticed is that the Popup now
appears gradually, instead of instantly (some nice eye candy!).
However, suggestions for the SuggestBox also appear like this and it
is irritating. Is there any way to go back to "instant popup" for
the .gwt-SuggestBoxPopup elements?

On Apr 8, 6:32 am, rusty <rustysh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Excellent work, go GWT team!
>
> I just switched our project over. Initial impressions are very good.
> Nice work with integrating animation into it as well. I like the new
> showcase example as well, but I wonder if the stack panel wouldn't
> work better as a slide than that weird fade thing it does?
>
> Output files are about the same size as Milestone 1, however compile
> time has increased a bit. Our project which used to take about 45
> seconds to build now takes 1m20. Not sure if that's specifically
> something to do with our project or whether it will be a general
> thing? I'm sure you've crammed all sorts of goodness into it, but
> anything you can do to tune that compile time would be awesome!
>

Sam Halliday

unread,
Apr 10, 2008, 6:22:02 PM4/10/08
to Google Web Toolkit
I've successfully ported a webapp which uses 2 RPC calls to use 1.5
and my code is now so much prettier without all those casts!

Thank you for the Java 5 support, guys!

Andrej

unread,
Apr 12, 2008, 5:21:59 AM4/12/08
to Google Web Toolkit
hi,
in version <1.5M2 following was possible:

public class ListBox extends com.google.gwt.user.client.ui.ListBox {
public ListBox(Element element) {
setElement(element);
onAttach();
}
public void remove() {
onDetach();
}
}

so I can get existing Element (rendered by backend)
and "hook" ListBox on it.

this is no longer possible in gwt1.5M2, because of setElement()
change...

Joel Webber

unread,
Apr 15, 2008, 2:44:45 PM4/15/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com
Andrej,

Please see issue 1544 and the following thread:

We're going to solve the problem of being able to instantiate form-element widgets around existing elements once and for all, which should deal with the use case you've described.

The problem with setElement() being callable multiple times is that it becomes extremely difficult for widgets to maintain any useful invariants if their elements can be swapped out from underneath them.

Cheers,
joel.

Dejan

unread,
Apr 17, 2008, 6:05:16 AM4/17/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi group,

congratulations for the great work, also to Sanjiv for the express
support for GWT1.5M2 (gwt-ext deploy from this morning works
perfectly).

However, I would like to report that M2 build fails on
String.format(<string>, <string>), saying that "The method
format(String, String) is undefined for the type String".

best regards,
Dejan

Axel Kittenberger

unread,
Apr 18, 2008, 7:08:43 AM4/18/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Does this mean the iframeless crosssite version is gone? :-(((

Thomas Broyer

unread,
Apr 18, 2008, 8:24:36 AM4/18/08
to Google Web Toolkit


On 18 avr, 13:08, Axel Kittenberger <axe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Does this mean the iframeless crosssite version is gone? :-(((

I can't see how it relates to String.format(String,String) not
working, but no, it isn't. You have to *request* for it explicitly
though, by putting the following in your gwt.xml file:
<add-linker name="xs" />

Axel Kittenberger

unread,
Apr 18, 2008, 11:19:48 AM4/18/08
to Google Web Toolkit
I usually hit reply just to the lowest post of the thread :) Call it a
dumpness at me or a user interface inconsistency from google groups or
potential misunderstanding, i don't know.

Thanks for the tip with the add-link! iFrame is gone, yay! (I dunno
know why, but here in house there is a fundamental iFrame hate, so I
avoid them when possible.

@Widget Animations, is this going be become a late-linking option also
one can turn on/off in his xml file too?

Joe Cole

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 12:28:09 AM4/19/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Yes, I would prefer if the animations were off by default as well, or
at least if we can turn them off. Instant popups are really important
for us. This toolkit's m.o. is user friendliness, and I don't think
you can decide in a general case if animations are always better for
the end user.

Joe

On Apr 11, 5:26 am, Sebastian <sebastian.l.bal...@googlemail.com>
wrote:

jhulford

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 4:18:51 PM4/19/08
to Google Web Toolkit
+1 for animations being disabled by default (especially popup/dialog
ones).

Dejan

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 3:52:15 AM4/19/08
to Google Web Toolkit
There is a method setAnimationEnabled(boolean) in HasAnimation
interface (implemented by PopupPanel, SuggestBox etc.), so animation
can be switched off. In fact, as there are just a few classes
implementing HasAnimation, extending those classes with
setAnimationEnabled(false) in constructor might solve the problem of
animation by default.

Dejan

Thomas Broyer

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 6:35:55 AM4/19/08
to Google Web Toolkit

On Apr 19, 6:28 am, Joe Cole <profilercorporat...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, I would prefer if the animations were off by default as well, or
> at least if we can turn them off. Instant popups are really important
> for us. This toolkit's m.o. is user friendliness, and I don't think
> you can decide in a general case if animations are always better for
> the end user.

See http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/detail?r=2060
You can set gwt.enableAnimations to false to completely disable
animations.

Axel Kittenberger

unread,
Apr 21, 2008, 5:05:14 AM4/21/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Another worry about 1.5 (asking especially Fred :-) : gwtexporter ...
I guess the available version for 1.4 will break, or? My project
relies heavily on it, couldn't this ideally be integrated into the
core GWT? Exporting only parts of a GWT application/widget seems like
a core functionality one could ask for...

markww

unread,
Apr 21, 2008, 10:37:50 AM4/21/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi,

When I go to download the 1.5 M2 zip, I get a warning saying that it's
deprecated upon trying to download. Is this normal, or is there a more
recent M2 file for download? I followed this link:

> http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/downloads/list?can=4&q=ve...

Thanks

Guy Rouillier

unread,
Apr 21, 2008, 12:25:59 PM4/21/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com
markww wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When I go to download the 1.5 M2 zip, I get a warning saying that it's
> deprecated upon trying to download. Is this normal, or is there a more
> recent M2 file for download? I followed this link:

Yes, it's normal. They are just telling you this is not
production-level code.


--
Guy Rouillier

Fred Sauer

unread,
Apr 21, 2008, 11:36:46 PM4/21/08
to Google-We...@googlegroups.com, Ray Cromwell
Axel,

The gwt-exporter project is actually Ray's work.
  http://code.google.com/p/gwt-exporter/

Perhaps he can shed some light on its 1.5 compatibility.

Fred
--
Fred Sauer
fr...@allen-sauer.com

blissteria

unread,
May 7, 2008, 6:06:57 AM5/7/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi,

I just want to warn the community about the change in the Composite
class. Indeed I have lost half a day because of the new implementation
of the onBrowserEvent in the Composite class. I trully believe that
the new behavior is the expected one. But I have made some hacks to
have this behavior and the M2 broke my hacks.


Thanks.

blissteria

unread,
May 7, 2008, 10:35:07 AM5/7/08
to Google Web Toolkit
I've read my previous post a second time, and the "thanks" at the end
seems to hide a little anger but it's not the case, it's a thank for
all the gwt wonderful work.

Sorry.

blissteria

unread,
May 7, 2008, 1:32:59 PM5/7/08
to Google Web Toolkit
I've just seen that the type SerializableException is now
deprecated... Does this means that IsSerializable will also be
deprecated and that we don't have to deal anymore with it?

Allahbaksh

unread,
May 12, 2008, 7:25:52 AM5/12/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi Bruce,
Thanks for excellent work at Google. I am really happy about the new
release GWT 1.5. Can you please let me know when GWT 1.5 will be
available for production. We have used GWT 1.3 along with DOJO in
earlier version of our application. With the cool features of GWT 1.5
we are looking forward for GWT 1.5.

Any idea when Release Candidate will be availble. One more thing when
will be your book available to buy. I am looking forward for that.
Excellent work!!
Regards,
Allahbaksh

masterGaurav

unread,
May 30, 2008, 9:26:19 AM5/30/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi Allahbaksh,

> available for production. We have used GWT 1.3 along with DOJO in
> earlier version of our application. With the cool features of GWT 1.5
> we are looking forward for GWT 1.5.

Can you please elaborate what have you done?
I would be interested to learn about your experience with Dojo-GWT
since I'm also working on creating the complete bridge (dojo 1.x and
GWT 1.5)!


--
Cheers,
Gaurav Vaish
www.mastergaurav.com
www.edujini-labs.com


maks

unread,
Jun 1, 2008, 8:43:22 AM6/1/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Go Google Web Toolkit :D

Allahbaksh

unread,
Jun 2, 2008, 12:48:54 AM6/2/08
to Google Web Toolkit
Hi Gaurav,
Since GWT had not proper TabBar so we used DOJO tab. (GWT tabs does
not wrap). The VerticalSplitPanel, HorizontalSplitPanel widget has
been used from DOJO.

The same application is not running properly due to application
loading time. Hence I though I will completely re-engineer it using
GWT1.5.

Regards,
Allahbaksh

On May 30, 6:26 pm, masterGaurav <gaurav.va...@gmail.com> wrote:
> HiAllahbaksh,
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages