6 ms·

> People got burned by GWT [...] What do you mean?

crispyambulance 11y ago
Back in the day, there were few javascript libraries and none of them could handle differences between browsers consistently. This was when people had to "roll their own" javascript, explicitly use xmlhttprequest (ajax) and web development was a pain in the ass. People will laugh when I say this now, but for a time GWT was seen as an AWESOME alternative. The proposition that you could just write java and just have GWT shit out html and javascript for you was incredibly compelling. ... until you started using it!
- emilburzo 11y ago
  > .. until you started using it! I've been building stuff using GWT for the past 5 years, so I'm either doing it wrong or I'm completely missing something. So, what's wrong with GWT?
  - crispyambulance 11y ago
    There's nothing "wrong" with GWT itself and it served a purpose, but now that javascript/web tooling is sooo much better than 2006, GWT is less compelling. Last update was when, 2014?
    - emilburzo 11y ago
      > GWT is less compelling. Last try :-) Why? > Last update was when, 2014? https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt/commits/master https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt/commits/master
  - jimbokun 11y ago
    We have a large GWT code base, although others here work on it more than I do. Problems that seem to get mentioned a lot: 1. Difficult to develop or debug without custom IDE plug ins. With Google cutting back on their investment, not clear how well those plug ins will be maintained in the future. 2. Awkward to work with Javascript libraries, at least compared to all Javascript development. 3. Sometimes hard to predict exactly what Javascript will be emitted for specific Java code. 4. Remembering the rules for what Java code can or cannot be compiled by the GWT compiler. 5. A lot of indirection. The event model has definite benefits, but it also seems to make it very hard to figure out what the program will do by just navigating the code. 6. Difficult to find developers willing and able to work on a GWT code base.
    - emilburzo 11y ago
      > 1. Difficult to develop or debug without custom IDE plug ins. With Google cutting back on their investment, not clear how well those plug ins will be maintained in the future. Interesting, I'm just using IntelliJ IDEA‎ and their GWT plugin. What are they using? > 2. Awkward to work with Javascript libraries, at least compared to all Javascript development. Fair enough, it does take some getting used to it. > 3. Sometimes hard to predict exactly what Javascript will be emitted for specific Java code. I'm not sure why this matters? I thought that's the idea when you add another abstraction layer. > 4. Remembering the rules for what Java code can or cannot be compiled by the GWT compiler. Oh I think I get it now, they haven't migrated to Super Dev Mode yet. That way it no longer requires a browser plugin (the old devmode), and the code is just JS + sourcemaps. And if you use code that can't be compiled, you know straight away, not just when doing a production compile. > 5. A lot of indirection. The event model has definite benefits, but it also seems to make it very hard to figure out what the program will do by just navigating the code. I don't agree with this, but I'm probably biased as a Java guy. > 6. Difficult to find developers willing and able to work on a GWT code base. I'm available :-P But being serious, thank you for the write-up, you do have some good points.

Back in the day, there were few javascript libraries and none of them could handle differences between browsers consistently. This was when people had to "roll their own" javascript, explicitly use xmlhttprequest (ajax) and web development was a pain in the ass. People will laugh when I say this now, but for a time GWT was seen as an AWESOME alternative. The proposition that you could just write java and just have GWT shit out html and javascript for you was incredibly compelling. ... until you started using it!

emilburzo 11y ago
> .. until you started using it! I've been building stuff using GWT for the past 5 years, so I'm either doing it wrong or I'm completely missing something. So, what's wrong with GWT?
- crispyambulance 11y ago
  There's nothing "wrong" with GWT itself and it served a purpose, but now that javascript/web tooling is sooo much better than 2006, GWT is less compelling. Last update was when, 2014?
  - emilburzo 11y ago
    > GWT is less compelling. Last try :-) Why? > Last update was when, 2014? https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt/commits/master https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt/commits/master
- jimbokun 11y ago
  We have a large GWT code base, although others here work on it more than I do. Problems that seem to get mentioned a lot: 1. Difficult to develop or debug without custom IDE plug ins. With Google cutting back on their investment, not clear how well those plug ins will be maintained in the future. 2. Awkward to work with Javascript libraries, at least compared to all Javascript development. 3. Sometimes hard to predict exactly what Javascript will be emitted for specific Java code. 4. Remembering the rules for what Java code can or cannot be compiled by the GWT compiler. 5. A lot of indirection. The event model has definite benefits, but it also seems to make it very hard to figure out what the program will do by just navigating the code. 6. Difficult to find developers willing and able to work on a GWT code base.
  - emilburzo 11y ago
    > 1. Difficult to develop or debug without custom IDE plug ins. With Google cutting back on their investment, not clear how well those plug ins will be maintained in the future. Interesting, I'm just using IntelliJ IDEA‎ and their GWT plugin. What are they using? > 2. Awkward to work with Javascript libraries, at least compared to all Javascript development. Fair enough, it does take some getting used to it. > 3. Sometimes hard to predict exactly what Javascript will be emitted for specific Java code. I'm not sure why this matters? I thought that's the idea when you add another abstraction layer. > 4. Remembering the rules for what Java code can or cannot be compiled by the GWT compiler. Oh I think I get it now, they haven't migrated to Super Dev Mode yet. That way it no longer requires a browser plugin (the old devmode), and the code is just JS + sourcemaps. And if you use code that can't be compiled, you know straight away, not just when doing a production compile. > 5. A lot of indirection. The event model has definite benefits, but it also seems to make it very hard to figure out what the program will do by just navigating the code. I don't agree with this, but I'm probably biased as a Java guy. > 6. Difficult to find developers willing and able to work on a GWT code base. I'm available :-P But being serious, thank you for the write-up, you do have some good points.