Comments on: Who’s using GWT?

By: Adam Gent

Adam Gent — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:02:06 +0000

Optimization aside, JQuery and friends are great for web sites that need a little DHTML.

But if your developing a web application then Javascript just sucks. Seriously. People that say different usually are ones that have not built complex Web 2.0 applications.

The most important power of a programming language is its ability to adapt to change. Java/C# has some of the best refactoring tools and has very consistent way of doing things (getters, setters, interfaces).

Renaming a variable or function in javascript takes so much valuable time even with unit tests.

By: John Patterson

John Patterson — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 04:27:25 +0000

The extra efficiency is very nice but as I wrote above – the main reason to use GWT is the tool support for Java. GWT is more than just a JavaScript compiler although that is a major component. The tools to debug your Java code _in_ the browser are essential and probably lacking from the projects you mention. The component libraries are also very good and frameworks for internationalisation and browser specific code rock. All in all it is a package that is hard to match without turning to Flash or Silverlight.

By: Patrick Wallace

Patrick Wallace — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 04:18:55 +0000

If you believe in writing JavaScript without writing Javascript, don't just limit yourself to public static void main Java. You can do it in other equally persnickity langauges. Why not write your JavaScript in Scheme using Scheme2JS? (define (scream x) ("Argh!" x)) What about writing your JavaScript in Ruby with ? You can get trendy on the Rails (but watch out for the third one.) Or look sharp, feel sharp on Microsoft's bandwagon by writing your JavaScript in C# using Script#. OUch. It's very sharp. There are yet more long-ways-around for a JavaScript-avoider, but I tire of finding them. The correct and efficient answer is to just pick a good package that solves the compatibility issues like jQuery or Prototype and get on with Ajaxing everything in sight. Who in their right mind is going to burn their eyes out worrying over avoiding a few K being downloaded in the age of video on the web? Get up to speed. It's a megabytes/second Internet, baby.

By: John Patterson

John Patterson — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 22:44:27 +0000

You are missing the point. As far as optimisation goes – as the worlds most experienced JavaScript optimiser – you should recognise that downloading an entire jQuery library to us a couple of functions is not efficient. A compiled GWT program only includes optimsed, inline coded that is actually used. But the real gain to developers is that you are writing in Java with the worlds best IDE’s… not hacking a scripting language.

Using JavaScript to write anything complex is like whipping yourself while being trampled by horses.

By: Patrick Wallace

Patrick Wallace — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:22:55 +0000

If the answer is merely that GWT produces JavaScript which is “more optimized” that I can write by hand, I’m not only unconvinced, I’m insulted. I started programming back in the days when I had to write my own device controller to get the serial port to talk to the modem and my own BBS software to talk to the world: all in ASM with just 32K of RAM. Don’t talk to me about optimization.
The significant issue for any app running in a browser is compatibility, not optimization. Using Java to spit out canned JavaScript is like whipping a wagon to get the horse to go.