Group items tagged

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.

* I notice that you're injecting instances of your activities into your activity mapper. Activities are meant to be fairly lightweight objects, as opposed to the views that represent them, so they don't need to be singletons (which they effectively are since you have a single app with a single injected activity mapper). It's probably not necessarily a problem unless your activities have state associated with them (such as the entity that the user is currently working with), which you have to be careful to clear out between uses with different data. The same can be said about places.

My understanding is that you only want a single area of the shell to be managed by one ActivityManager. So if you have an entire shell/layout with more than one area that changes, let's say a main content area as well as a context menu (If I have MainAppPlace and SettingsAppPlace and OtherAppPlace both of which extend MainAppPlace, and you want to show a different context menu for Place of type SettingsAppPlace and places of type OtherAppPlace) I would just have main Shell that has a SimplePanel for content and Simplepanel for context_menu I just use an ActivityManager to control one spot of the main layout. is this not right? do you want your activitymanager controlling more than one area??

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...

> 2- when google wants to address problem of Nested/Layered presenters ? > header/body/footer, and body having its own dockpanellayout structure. We use the technique described in part II. Composite views are responsible for instantiating their own children, and making them available for the parallel composite presenters.

If you're referring to the ColumnDefinitions, we know they'll scale. One, it requires minimal widget overhead and is fast. No more embedding hundreds of widgets within a table. Two, it's extensible, and testable. As your model grows, your ColumnDefinitions grow, not your views.  ColumnDefinitions are quite trivial, the bulk of the code dedicated to generating HTML, and don't require a GwtTestCase.