What is Digg?Sponsored by Hot Tub Time Machine
R-Rated Trailer for "Hot Tub Time Machine" view!
kicksomepast.com - Hot Girls in Hot Tubs. What more do you need?
33 Comments
- dfltr, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10i admire what they're doing with GWT, but the ridiculous java-laden overhead for that toolkit is just nuts. even if you're starting from scratch, you end up completely dependent on their framework -- which is silly, given how easy (and often necessary) it is to mix and match with other AJAX frameworks.
- 83457, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8"I don't see how it can GET any easier?"
By building an abstraction layer so you don't have to worry about coding the javascript for common web components. Soon we'll be building perfectly functional Ajax web apps in a visual environment and only writing javascript for custom functionality. - illicium, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Mac OS X support = easier?
Alright. :/ - seventoes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Prototype seems like you need to know rocket science when you see jquery!
http://www.jquery.com/
To load an element with the contents of an external page:
$("selector").load("/path/to/file.php"); - MagicBobert, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Agreed. I tried GWT once and it just didn't do anything for me. I felt like I was wasting time learning just another abstraction layer when I could have already finished my Ajax app.
Ajax isn't that hard, and a good scripting library makes it easy as pie. There's really no need to write stuff in Java and "compile" it to a JavaScript Ajax app with GWT. - DaedalusvX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5You should check out jQuery. Its power lies in its functional approach to development, its broad developer support, smart API, excellent documentation and its compactness.
Plus, its development is managed under subversion and uses makefiles to customize the build to your needs, to automatically run unit tests and to compact it using Dean's packer.
Prototype allows you to do much of what jQuery does, as has been pointed out in the past. It's just that jQuery lets you do it much faster and with a much cleaner interface. Give it a try. - Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3hey its still google
- flipouk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Me, me, me... OK we get it. GWT is not for you :) It is intended at other audiences. I am pretty keen on it, personally. I would never have touched Ajax without a tool like that. So _I_ like it, even though it doesn't bring _you_ anything :)
- cybercerberus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How exactly does GWT enable "***** programmers" to "abuse AJAX"?
- dfltr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4seriously. i secretly think that java guys have an actual physical addiction to it.
i mean, we're talking about writing ajax apps in pure java here. does that sounds completely insane to anyone else? - cybercerberus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It only sounds insane if you're not smart enough to realize that writing cross-browser compatible AJAX is next to impossible without something like GWT.
- cybercerberus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2And what, pray tell, gives you the rather hilarious impression that Google management is trying to "kill it off"?
- gravedigga, on 02/04/2009, -0/+1Got a framework that compiles C# to JavaScript+HTML+CSS? No? ***** off with your useless comment then
- RidinDirty, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2This looks like one of those projects that google mangement is rightly trying to kill off. A solution to a nonexistent problem cooked up in the labs for fun & not much else.
- sicapitan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1JQuery of course. Although, with CakePHP, like Rails, I do employ a much serviced and supported library as prototype.
With the choice of frameworks available, its best to support your best 3 (or the best 3) and leave the rest. - FreddieD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Take a look at their JSNI (Javascript Native Interface) feature. It allows for direct embedding of Javascript inside of GWT's java classes.
- armbar, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7This is really dumb...Ajax is about the easiest thing you can learn in Javascript. It takes about 5-10 lines for the whole request. Wow...I need a Java abstraction layer for that.
My nicely spaced Ajax wrapper is about 70 lines and has extra hooks and features. What is 13 megs doing for me? - flipouk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2For people like me who know java pretty well but close to nothing of JavaScript/Ajax, this thing is a godsend! I had ignored it until now as I develop on a Mac. This is a very good toolkit that is obviously not aimed at everyone, but for those on target like me, it's great.
Thank you Google! - gravedigga, on 02/04/2009, -0/+1***** programmers don't understand what GWT is meant for.
- crzyltlman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's not like that's unique to GWT. Pretty hard to do AJAX in any form without the J.
- gravedigga, on 02/04/2009, -0/+1You are mistaken.
GWT is an application framework, not an AJAX framework.
That way one can write a web application with a suitable backend in Java. It is not meant to be inserted into normal web pages. - cybercerberus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Wow. Scarcely have I seen as many morons talking about ***** they have no clue about as I see in this set of comments. Before you mental midgets go off on GWT, maybe you should spend more than 3 seconds and actually find out what it DOES? Sound like a plan? No? Okay, go back to your PHP "programming" now, then. LOL
- jmuchrisf, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5Call me Naive, but with the prototype library, why would you need anything to make Ajax easier? I don't see how it can GET any easier?
oh, it's not just AJAX.. but hey. - san1ty, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1This is a pretty impressive feat of engineering, but it has one fatal flaw: No graceful degredation. If you use this with your site, and you want your site to work with non-Javascript browsers, you basically need to reimplement everything separately in a non-Javascript way, as GWT simply won't work if your browser doesn't do Javascript.
- Logicalx, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@armbar
Uhmm... I think document.write() is the easiest thing to learn in javascript. Actually maybe alert(). Stop making excuses to publicly stroke your epeen. It's small and always will be. - barakatx2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yeah, it was kind of disappointing that this whole thing is about adding Mac dev support...
- mutatron, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2It's a 13 meg download! I've been using My-Bic. What's GWT going to get me?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0heres another one of those web 2.0 AJAX apps. this one is interesting though in what it claims. Claims to convert any site into an online community and claims to connect people who are on that very site at that very instant.
check out http://www.matrixconnects.com - stockjones, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0whats the deal with the java layer. Add that for what? Because the java hipsters can go Oooooh. Most folks want the basic XmlRequest post get stuff you can esily do with javascript. This is tech overthinking tech once again. Making it more complex than it needs to be.
- jshusta, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7what thou cannot GET, thou shalt POST.
- dtm0, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Isn't it a bit late ¬_¬
I had to write my own code when I was playing with google's SDK a while back - jiminoc, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1great, so some ***** programmers can abuse ajax like they've done with animated gifs, scrolling status bars and stupid flash intro pages. nice
- stockjones, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0C# > java. Hard to swallow but true.
