so... I guess... my bet would be aligning more with the JS layer ?
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org>wrote:
ideally the JS API is similar to the Android/Java API...
sure to some degree there are differences, based on the underlying
platform, but having it fundamentally different (e.g. Factory/IDGenerator)
etc is a bit... :)
Things like that could haven been added in an overloaded ctor - perhaps we
can align the API a bit more, post 1.0.0
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Erik Jan de Wit <edewit(a)redhat.com>wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I want to create wrappers around aerogear-js to be able to use the
> Aerogear from Erria. What this task comes down to is to create a java api
> that calls the aerogear-js api. But then I rembered seeing an example in a
> presentation that you kept the apis the same on all platforms. So my work
> is already done I just have to look at the api defined in android. The only
> problem is there are some differences, for instance DataManager on the js
> side it can be created by passing some config object, but on the android
> side there is a need for an IdGenerator and a StoreFactory. So what do you
> guys think should I stick closer to the js api and really try to create a
> minimal wrapper that is close to that, or should I stick with the android
> api and maybe use parts of Errai to implement a bridge?
>
> Cheers,
> Erik Jan
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
blog:
http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions:
http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
twitter:
http://twitter.com/mwessendorf