Talk:Google Web Toolkit

Why this page is merged
80.224.39.32 22:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Why this page is merged with Google Code? I tried to add more information, but is removed...


 * Because it is part of the Google Code platform. Because of the individual minor articles for each Code service, it is much more efficient to mention them in a unifying article. --Mambo Jambo 00:54, 9 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I moved this page back from Google code to here, instead of a redirect. I would make some changes to the page on Google code to for this. GWT surely deserves an entry on its own. It is a pretty large project of Google Code. Shabda 12:03, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Any objections to adding this page to category:JavaScript libraries?--81.106.184.50 23:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. --81.106.184.50 20:44, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

The CRITICISM section needs to be rewritten in English
"...This model will in most scenarios create much larger JavaScript and HTML than what is possible to achieve with solutions where the JavaScript Widgets handcoded from before and is thought of rather as an API than as a "compiler result". ...."

-> "compiler result" is a general term with no special public meaning. There is no need to quote it any more than any other two words in the language.

-> This sentence has at least one if not two instances of a run on sentence. Its hard to tell if anything is being said. What is "...thought of rather as an API than as a 'compiler result' supposed to mean?" What is "...handcoded from before..." referring to? Is this some project the author was working on? At the very least, it should be reworked into multiple sentences.

"...An alternative way of creating an Ajax framework with "no-JavaScript pain capability" is to think of the browser as a purely rendering mechanism for predefined widgets and send messages from the server to those widgets and vice versa, see ZK_Framework."

-> "no-JavaScript pain capability..." Is "no-JavaScript" a new scripting language? What is "pain capability?" Why not quote "purely rendering mecanism?" Its just another fabricated term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bfisk (talk • contribs)


 * Agreed. I've tagged the section. utcursch | talk 04:07, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The criticism section is incorrect
The initial statement in the criticism section ("GWT compiles JavaScript and HTML from Java bytecode.") is simply not true.

http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/documentation/com.google.gwt.doc.DeveloperGuide.Fundamentals.html#JavaToJavaScriptCompiler

Given that the remainder of the criticism is based on this misinformation, it seems like the whole section should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.192.134.33 (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

GWT is not a software development framework
"One of the more difficult aspects of using the Google Web Toolkit for enterprise development is its lack of a framework. This is by design: GWT is a toolkit, not a framework.  It doesn’t tie you into a single approach or methodology, it lets you use any you like." 24.17.233.108 (talk) 07:20, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

GWT implemets Synchronized call
My project need synchronized call remote service in GWT.But I don't know how to implement it.Please help me.In our project, we must wait the service return the result and dependence on the result to choose which way go to.In this case we must use synchronized. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.238.106.178 (talk) 03:19, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

does "Other Frameworks" really needed ?
There is a category for javascript libraries, Category:JavaScript libraries to which other libraries page refers to. Why include this section for GWT ? (to make some publicity to these alternatives ? then the risk is to put back all category in this section). I propose to simply remove this section. Any comment ? Hugoyar (talk) 16:25, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that this section you are talking about is superfluous. I came to this discussion to question the presence of a "Google Code" link in the "See also" section. Amenel (talk) 14:14, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Use "Source to Source translation" instead of "cross compilation"?
I read this in the cross compiler article: "Not targeted by this definition are source to source translators, which are often mistakenly called cross compilers.". Is this the case in this article perhaps? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.252.233.26 (talk) 14:56, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Which application is using it?
which website is using it? Jackzhp (talk) 21:03, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Just found out by random that LogicalDOC is using it. Maybe one could create a List of Websites and Tools using GWT? 129.13.72.198 (talk) 13:56, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Surely there must be some criticism
So the old "criticism" section that apparently existed here at one time was bad and got deleted. Surely there must still be some criticism, of the approach (treating a Web browser as if it were nothing more than a window system running on a weird virtual machine, breaking the ability to save, link, share, etc., the rendered document) -- although many of those criticisms are properly general criticisms of the programming model this thing implies, which doesn't seem to have a name. 121a0012 (talk) 05:45, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Rename to GWT Web Toolkit?
"Google Web Toolkit" is an obsolete name from when GWT was still a Google project. It's a community project since 2.5, and it's always referred to "GWT" or by the backronym "GWT Web Toolkit" on gwtproject.org. Should this article be moved and updated correspondingly? - Sikon (talk) 12:01, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Does not belong in lead
The following does not belong in the lead, but it's so cryptic I can't even think up a quick way to bury it elsewhere in the article, pending a competent person to do it justice, if this is even worthy of note.


 * (Requirements for Linux Apache ant and Firefox < 27[2] as GWT Chrome plugin for Linux will not work[3]).

&mdash; MaxEnt 22:20, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Maintenance and rating of JavaScript articles
Concerning editing and maintaining JavaScript-related articles...

Collaboration...
If you are interested in collaborating on JavaScript articles or would like to see where you could help, stop by WikiProject JavaScript and feel free to add your name to the participants list. Both editors and programmers are welcome.

Where to list JavaScript articles
We've found over 300 JavaScript-related articles so far. If you come across any others, please add them to that list.

User scripts
The WikiProject is also taking on the organization of the Wikipedia community's user script support pages. If you are interested in helping to organize information on the user scripts (or are curious about what we are up to), let us know!

If you have need for a user script that does not yet exist, or you have a cool idea for a user script or gadget, you can post it at User scripts/Requests. And if you are a JavaScript programmer, that's a great place to find tasks if you are bored.

How to report JavaScript articles in need of attention
If you come across a JavaScript article desperately in need of editor attention, and it's beyond your ability to handle, you can add it to our list of JavaScript-related articles that need attention.

Rating JavaScript articles
At the top of the talk page of most every JavaScript-related article is a WikiProject JavaScript template where you can record the quality class and importance of the article. Doing so will help the community track the stage of completion and watch the highest priority articles more closely.

Thank you. The Transhumanist 01:09, 12 April 2017 (UTC)