@ProxyFor confusing GWT Designer

191 views
Skip to first unread message

Victor Lewis

unread,
Jun 7, 2011, 9:52:01 PM6/7/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
I am using App Engine 1.5, GWT 2.3 all in Eclipse 3.6.

I have a project with a server side class named domain.Hangout.  I have a RequestFactory proxy for it called shared.HangoutProxy.  The GWT compiles just fine for this project but when I try to launch Designer it complains that when parsing shared.HangoutProxy that it cannot resolve Hangout.

[ERROR] Line 3: The import com.aviatorlabs.ltl.domain.Hangout cannot be resolved

What seems to be confusing it is that there is an import of domain.Hangout in shared.HangoutProxy which is needed for the @ProxyFor annotation

@ProxyFor(value=Hangout.class, locator=ObjectifyLocator.class)

public interface HangoutProxy extends EntityProxy {


Am I doing something wrong?

Is Designer incompatible with RequestFactory?  If so, can I get Designer to ignore certain packages?

Please help.

Thank you,
  Victor



David Chandler

unread,
Jun 7, 2011, 10:13:39 PM6/7/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
Hmmm, could you please attach the error report from the GWT Designer screen that gives you this error?

As a workaround, you can try @ProxyForName instead with the fully-qualified classname instead of a reference to the class itself.

/dmc



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-web-toolkit/-/WFJ2REFhVS1nR0lK.
To post to this group, send email to google-we...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-web-tool...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.



--
David Chandler
Developer Programs Engineer, Google Web Toolkit
w: http://code.google.com/
b: http://googlewebtoolkit.blogspot.com/
t: @googledevtools

Konstantin Scheglov

unread,
Jun 8, 2011, 10:54:05 AM6/8/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
Please include also into error report following files:
1. module.gwt.xml
2. Handout.java
3. HandoutProxy.java

Victor Lewis

unread,
Jun 8, 2011, 9:59:28 PM6/8/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
Please find attached the requested report (the Java files are in the report zip and the gwt.xml is (obviously) attached separately).

I tried the @ProxyForName workaround but after making the change Designer continued to report the import problems on the same line as before even though there was no longer an import for that class.  I went as far as to open the exact file specified in the error in a text editor and it had the changes I had made to use @ProxyForName and no longer had the import statements.  Is Designer using a cache somewhere? I tried refreshing the project and doing a clean but it still insisted there was an import of com.aviatorlabs.ltl.domain.Hangout on line 3 when there clearly wasn't.

Thank you for your help.

-Victor


 

report-20110608-212945.zip
ltl.gwt.xml

Konstantin Scheglov

unread,
Jun 9, 2011, 11:40:24 AM6/9/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
OK, I can reproduce it.
Problem is that you use classes which are no part of "client" classpath.
This is OK, because there are used just in annotations.
However current version of GWT Designer does not include "output location" with *.class files into compilation ClassLoader.
This was fixed recently.

Victor Lewis

unread,
Jun 9, 2011, 7:19:37 PM6/9/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
Konstantin,

Thanks for your help.  I am glad to know that the problem has already been addressed.

I tried David's suggestion of using @ProxyForName and had what appear to be different problems.  I have attached the problem report but this one appears less helpful as there are no errors reported.

Thank you,

Victor

report-20110609-191604.zip

Victor Lewis

unread,
Jun 9, 2011, 7:21:26 PM6/9/11
to google-we...@googlegroups.com
I also meant to ask: is no one using Designer with RequestFactory?  Is there an alternate project layout that will make this work?

Thank you again, 
  Victor

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages