Graham Dumpleton wrote:
An application that relies on the server to simulate end-of-file will be a
broken application on some servers. This is not an uncommon problem.
Therefore the validator tests for this case; if you want an application
that actually works consistently, you shouldn't do
envi
2008/12/13 Ian Bicking :
> Graham Dumpleton wrote:
>>
>> Just noticed that although WSGI PEP doesn't specifically mention that
>> argument to read() on wsgi.input is optional, wsgiref.validate allows
>> calling read() with no argument.
>>
>>> From wsgiref.validate:
>>
>> """
>> * That wsgi.input is
Graham Dumpleton wrote:
Just noticed that although WSGI PEP doesn't specifically mention that
argument to read() on wsgi.input is optional, wsgiref.validate allows
calling read() with no argument.
From wsgiref.validate:
"""
* That wsgi.input is used properly:
- .read() is called with zero
Graham Dumpleton ha scritto:
Just noticed that although WSGI PEP doesn't specifically mention that
argument to read() on wsgi.input is optional, wsgiref.validate allows
calling read() with no argument.
wsgiref.validate makes also other assumptions about a WSGI application
that are not required
Just noticed that although WSGI PEP doesn't specifically mention that
argument to read() on wsgi.input is optional, wsgiref.validate allows
calling read() with no argument.
>From wsgiref.validate:
"""
* That wsgi.input is used properly:
- .read() is called with zero or one argument
class Inpu
