Question is about Google GWT Designer. GWT Designer can work with .java files without any .ui.xml files. But I have a gwt project where design is realized with .ui.xml files and java classes. It more complex then just java class. Do you heve any ideas what is it? May be it should be refactorized?
Thank you!
Firstly there's no need to refactor ready made UiBinder if it written well. This's a great GWT framework allowing separation of logic from view. If you reject it your project will be very difficult to maintain.
Secondly one and the same GWT project can contain the view implemented both in Java code and in UiBinder xml files. This situation occurs with a support of old projects where UiBinder wasn't yet. Uibinder is a much more modern approach which has many benefits. That is if you for some reason prefer declare view only in Java code without xml then write it in Java code. And this will coexist and work properly.
And most importantly present-day GWT Designer has support UiBinder. Otherwise, no one would use it.
Related
Has anyone been able to integrate the wonderful shorthanded syntax of LESS with the awesomely module, re-factor friendly and type-safe CSS of GWT UiBinder?
<ui:style with="com.lesscss.gwt">
.selector{
/* Can I haz LESS in here? */
}
</ui:style>
Naturally, you can use LESS with GWT -- You just have to use non-compiled css. I want my css to go through the LESS compiler, and then the GWT compiler.
There are no direct libraries for that, no.
LESS doesn't even have a java compiler, so I really don't think it's ever going to happen.
Suppose you could write a pre-compile routine that will go through your ui.xml files, compile contents of ui:style nodes and put the compiled versions back. Then you will run into continuous problems with your IDE complaining about improper CSS code.
As said before, there was no libraries to do that directly. But there is now ;) !
I recently wrote and published a library (HexaCss for GWT) which allows to bind a GWT application to external CSS files, while keeping type-safety and optimizations like pruning and css name obfuscation.
You use it like the traditionnal CssResource (so typesafely), but instead of binding to a CSS file Inside your GWT project, it binds to any external CSS file that you want (you can even bind multiple CSS files to the same application which gives you themes for your GWT application).
So in your case, the external CSS file would have been generated with HexaCss. That's what I do on many projects.
You can even use Sass, GSS and so on. You can also use the already written bindings for Bootstrap and Skeleton.
A sample which resembles to your question is this one, where the CSS is generated with Less, and used in GWT with HexaCss, which is then usable from UiBinder or Java directly.
Link to the sample : http://lteconsulting.fr/hexacss/demo/sample3/index.html - This is a very ugly demo showing only the idea. You can switch between themes with the listbox on the top.
Hope this helps !
Our webapp is implemented in GWT 2.2, with heavy use of UIBinder. I really like UIBinder's ability to define styles either inline with the HTML, or at least in a <ui:style> section. As a programmer, this modularity really appeals to me, as it puts the styling right where it's used.
And for styles that are used in more than one place, I refactor them to a CommonStyles.css/CommonStyles.java, and refer to that in my *.ui.xml files.
This has worked great so far, but now the company has contracted an HTML/CSS designer to re-work the design. We spent a few days trying to get him up to speed on Eclipse & GWT, without much success. To meet a deadline, we ended up having him just deliver an old-school giant CSS file to us, which we then painstakingly refactored back into the various ui.xml modules.
My question: Is it better to maintain a single, old-fashioned giant CSS file for a UIBinder app, so that designers can work with it? It pains me as a programmer to do things this way, but it seems like it's the only practical way to have non-programmers work on the design.
Is it unreasonable to expect designers to know an IDE such as Eclipse or Intellij?
From the perspective of the programmer of a company with one programmer and one designer:
The designer on my team never used eclipse or Java before our current project. We started using UiBinder stuff heavily about two months ago and, with maybe a couple of hours of help from me, he's managed to become quite proficient. He's now checking finished & laid out widgets into the source himself, with perfect CssResource etc modularization. I still set up the corresponding .css and .java files for him, but then I throw the setup at him, he writes 90% of the ui.xml & .css bit himself, and I come back and implement his ui in java afterwards. Occasionally I have to change a <div> to a <g:Panel> or whatever. He has not complained about it being too hard. Now he's starting to explore the extensions to css that gwt provides, like constants and expressions.
I'd say you shouldn't have to give up the benefits of UiBinder for the sake of your designers. In my own project, I expect to have to set up all of the code and generate templates for all of the Java interfaces, but I expect my partner to be able to add his own styles, separate css intelligently (e.g. CommonStyles.java vs. ThisWidgetStyles.java), and understand what's happening when his style names turn into GVDWK.
I am on searching special features of GWT which are present only in GWT and not in other web framework. I am a student and I am not well acquainted to the many web frameworks on the market, so if u can help me increasing my list of special GWT features, it would be a great help. Some which i know are:
1. GWT allows using java to program
web. (only, it also allows merging
javascript through JSNI of course)
2. The developer does not have to be a guru in browser incompatibilities
to develop web sites which works on
a variety of browsers because
incompatibilities are handled by GWT
through differed bindind
3. GWT allows easy integration of popular Java Tools such as ,
hibernate through gilead
4. GWT enables server implementation not only in java but also other
languages such as php
5. GWT enables code splitting which improves application interactivity
by allowing javaScript file to
download only when required
6. In essence GWT is toolkit, it does not force a way to program,
other layers can be placed on top of
it to program such as placing MVP or
MVC framework on top of GWT and then
develop app
7. GWT MVP is great because first it allows collaborative working, faster
testing with JUnit and the event bus
allows many updates in client side
application by placing event on the
event bus
8. GWT compiled java files to obfuscated mode which is first small
and make the application safer
because bots fails on the javascript
generated during the obfuscated mode
In case in the 8 points, i've mention something which not special to GWT, then let me know.
There's also 'perfect caching', which is the term used to describe the way that GWT optimises JavaScript for each browser.
Instead of building a large JavaScript file, with code that can handle all of the various browsers, GWT builds multiple JavaScript files at compile time, and downloads only the one that is relevant to the browser type that is being used.
EDIT: Every time you make a change to your Java code, GWT changes the name of the corresponding JavaScript file. Web servers can turn on caching for the JavaScript files (so that browsers won't re-download the same file), assured that the name will change when the Java code changes, and the browser will then download the latest version.
EDIT: I also really like the CssResource feature. By creating obfuscated CSS style names, GWT effectively gives each widget its own namespace for CSS styles; for example, I could define a 'pretty' style name on two different widgets, and have those styles using different CSS rules. Of course, it is possible to share CSS styles between widgets too.
Image resources are cool too. They optimise the way that images are downloaded and accessed.
Don't forget internationalization.
I think you pulled together a pretty decent list of differentiators there already. I think that one point worth adding is the RequestFactory feature in the most recent release, which, if you will, is simplistically speaking and RPC for data and makes it quite easy to develop Create, Read, Update and Delete - type (CRUD) of applications.
There are other, more important/wider accepted GUI-Frameworks that are based on Java.
There are for example Struts and JSF. That's why some of your points don't fit only for GWT, but for all GUI java frameworks in general, e.g. bullet point 1, 2 & 3.
But to add another one:
I think GWT is an easy way to code an AJAX-application, because it hides the AJAX stuff quite well. Wouldn't you agree?
Furthermore, GWT is a proprietary framework (which is somehow a unique property). JSF is standardized and Struts is lead by Apache.
I have my first GWT project that I created using UiBinder (GWT 2.0 way) which I found to be easier than write my UI creation Java source code (GWT 1.0 way).
But I saw this thing called GWT Designer that Google are releasing for free. It has nice features and wizards which were missing with the standard Google Eclipse Plugin. I like it, but I still think that using UiBinder is better. I think GWT Designer will be really useful when it can help you write UiBinder XML files (GWT 2.0 way), and not just source code (GWT 1.0 way).
What do you think about it?
Do I need to migrate to GWT Designer project?
Will it be better if I migrate but still keep UiBinder UI creation?
The latest GWT Designer now has support for UiBinder, and it works great.
http://download.instantiations.com/D2GWTDoc/continuous/latest/docs/html/wizards/gwt/uibinder_composite.html
UiBinder can give you better performance and a better optimized download than traditional widget construction; to me that's enough of a reason to stick with UiBinder. If your app is light and fast enough as it is then the choice probably comes down to what style of development suits you best.
I wouldn't go as far as to port your existing UiBinder templates into the designer. Google will be adding support for them to GWT designer soon enough.
I haven't used the newly-freed GWT Designer yet myself, but I wouldn't expect that it would warrant migrating your entire project over to it if it's already written using UIBinder.
Remember that the two methods of constructing a UI are not mutually exclusive -- you can use the GWT Designer to create a new widget and use it in an existing UIBinder project, and if you decide it's that much better, you can consider migrating at that point. Or not, since they can still happily coexist.
If you are doing professional development in an organization that utilizes experts in CSS and html, then GWt is going to be a tough sell if you don't use something like UIBinder for layouting as well as individual pages. I also think that a CSS designer can do a better job at responding to UI requirement changes than a java developer using GWT layouting techniques.
However if your java staff has control of the requirements and don't have to answer to UI designers, then I suppose choosing between delcarative templates and something like GWT Designer is just a matter preference.
As said in the relaunch announcement:
Now that these products are available again, we hope you’ll start using them within your GWT projects. Meanwhile, our next step is to more deeply unify them into the GWT family of tools by blending the fantastic Instantiations technology into the Google Plugin for Eclipse (GPE). So, there’s much more to come, including things we’re pretty sure you’ll like, such as UiBinder support in GWT Designer.
It wouldn't make sense to get ride of your UiBinder code since GWT Designer will support it soon.
DON'T use the designer plugin. The most recent update (8.1.1 at the time of this post) contains buttons that allow the user to add elements that are incompatible with IE, for instance CellTable, DeckPanel, HorizontalPanel and VerticalPanel.
This means whoever uses the plugin, uses it entirely at their peril. If IE7 tries to pull in these elements, it will load a partial page but fail to load components that use these elements. IE8 may not be able to load the application at all.
I am upgrading a project with around 60 java classes, from 1.4 to 2.0 . Apart from replacing deprecated functions, adding generics, will converting the whole project into UI Binder approach i.e. XML and Corresponding working Java classes, be recommended. Or shall i go on adding new UI requirments using Ui Binder and leaving the existing code as it is?
I'd go with UiBinder all the way - that way you'll get most from the benefits of UiBinder (like nice CSS handling/minification/obfuscation). And the rewrite will be a good chance to look at the older code and do some refactoring - like reorganizing the Widgets to be more lightweight (more pure HTML via UiBinder, less Widgets, but don't go overboard ;)), maybe introducing History support, i18n, etc. I had the same dilemma some time ago and took the full UiBinder approach and don't regret it ;) It makes it easier to work with the code too - since the UI code is consistent.