Group items tagged

I think the overall idea of activities is that they are short-lived instances, so they're effectively "lazily created" (actually, a new instance is created each time one is needed) and they don't need to be "awoken" because if they're not currently in use they're already "dead" and garbage collected. The ActivityManager (actually its associated ActivityMapper) will decide whether a particular activity is needed (and then instantiate it, possibly going through a GWT.runAsync for code splitting); the activity will listen to events its interested in *during its lifetime* (e.g. whether some object has changed or has been added or deleted, so it can update its view); but when it's done (stopped or cancelled), it's simply thrown away (the event bus passed to the start() method is a ResettableEventBus so all handlers have been automatically unregistered for you, which as a side effect allows the activity to be garbage collected). This is the (AIUI) intended use, but nothing forces you to write such short-lived instances: you can very well use singletons, but then you'll have the additional task of maintaining state between "runs" (start/stop or start/cancel), in which case your activity can listen to events from the event bus after being stopped/cancelled (just use the "real" event bus instead of the ResettableEventBus passed to the start() method); but it won't "ask to be revealed": navigation is handled at another layer, triggered on the PlaceController and handled by ActivityManagers.

your ChatBoxPresenter isn't related to a "place", i.e. it's "awoken" based on a "business event", not a navigation event; and in other words, it's not an Activity: case made. Activities (ActivityManager) is limited in scope to reacting to place changes and navigation (not that you couldn't use the Activity "contract" in other scenarios, such as your "chat box", but the ActivityManager wouldn't be the right tool for the job, you'd have to find/write another "activity manager" for your different use case). In other words: GWT 2.1 Activities won't replace GWTP as a whole (and I believe, as I already said in the past, that it's not its goal either).

I believe the reason we've not created View and Presenter interfaces to date is because there are two different styles of MVP widely in use, only one of which allows the view to call the presenter as in your example. Which leaves us in the funny position that the new MVP framework is missing *formal* definitions of View and Presenter. Personally, I think it's a good thing that GWT Activities and Places are independent of views and presenters so as not to force you into one model. I think View and Presenter as you've described would fall in the category of things that are not quite core code, but are nevertheless useful abstractions that probably need a home in the GWT source somewhere for reference. We'll chew on this a bit for 2.1.1...

The kinds of changes to Activities and Places we're contemplating for future versions of GWT are primarily along the lines of using annotations and generators to automate the creation of PlaceTokenizers and ActivityMappers, for example. We're not talking about wholesale replacement, as we strive for API backward compatibility with each release.

How to navigate To navigate to a new Place in your application, call the goTo() method on your PlaceController. This is illustrated above in the goTo() method of HelloActivity. PlaceController warns the current Activity that it may be stopping (via a PlaceChangeRequest event) and once allowed, fires a PlaceChangeEvent with the new Place. The PlaceHistoryHandler listens for PlaceChangeEvents and updates the URL history token accordingly. The ActivityManager also listens for PlaceChangeEvents and uses your app's ActivityMapper to start the Activity associated with the new Place. Rather than using PlaceController.goTo(), you can also create a Hyperlink containing the history token for the new Place obtained by calling your PlaceHistoryMapper.getToken(). When the user navigates to a new URL (via hyperlink, back button, or bookmark), PlaceHistoryHandler catches the ValueChangeEvent from the History object and calls your app's PlaceHistoryMapper to turn the history token into its corresponding Place. It then calls PlaceController.goTo() with the new Place. What about apps with multiple panels in the same window whose state should all be saved together in a single URL? GWT 2.1 does not attempt to provide a generic implementation of a composite Place; however, your app could create a CompositePlace, CompositeActivity, and CompositePlace.Tokenizer classes that delegate to the constituent members. In this case, only the composite objects would need to be registered with your app's ActivityMapper and PlaceHistoryMapper.

For your convenience, here is the net of it. With MVC, the model is thick with business rules and glue code to a data access layer. The view has lots of dependencies on the model. The controller is usually a framework component driven by some kind of configuration, usually XML based. With MVP, the model is lightweight POJOs. The view is mockable. It is the presenter that is heavy with glue code and business rules. The thinking here is that MVP is more suited for TDD than MVC. Another notable feature of MVP in GWT apps is the use of an event bus instead of hard coded event handler dependencies. Typically, that event bus is implemented as either the HandlerManager from GWT itself or the PropertyChangeSupport class from the GWTx library.

In our app, in effect, each "parent presenter" also plays the role of "app controller"; but because we have the presenter/view dichotomy, the view exposes setSomeWidget(...) methods that the presenter calls; e.g. setHeader(...), setBody(...), setFooter(...).

> 3- what do you think of "presenter.go(container)" ? We do it the other way around: our presenters have a getView() method and the parent calls container.add((Widget) child.getView()). This is actually split between the presenter and the view, see above: view.setHeader(childPresenter.getView()) in the presenter, and containerWidget.add((Widget) child) in the view. The only "issue" with presenter.go(container) is that container must be a "simple" container, which means that when it's meant to be a dock (layout) panel, tab panel, or some other complex panel (or an absolute panel and you want to add with coordinates), you actually have to add a SimplePanel first and pass it as the "container" to the go() method. Otherwise, I can't see a problem with presenter.go(container).

navigation/ > history token inside multiple IF statements ? I'm using a very similar approach as the one in bikeshed: http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/source/browse/trunk/bikes...