On 16-06-2009, Etienne Robillard wrote:
Pfft, I bet this thread would have never happened without my initial
intervention. Likewise, I think you're just using this thread for your
own interests, disregarding my own arguments on why web frameworks are
so hard to cope with.
If you want to
+1 Bobo. I like stuff Jim writes.
--
Cheers,
Noah
___
Web-SIG mailing list
Web-SIG@python.org
Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
On Jun 16, 2009, at 12:39 PM, Martijn Faassen wrote:
...
He said it the goal is for it to be simple,
he didn't say other people's works are complicated.
Yup, however I can see how You don't have to be a genius could be
construed as implying that you do have to be a genius to use other
Hey Jim,
Jim Fulton wrote:
Bobo is a light-weight framework for creating WSGI web applications.
Do you know if there are plans/possibilities to make the routing part of
Bobo available for other frameworks and/or in a non-decorator fashion?
cheers,
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content
On Jun 17, 2009, at 5:12 AM, Chris Withers wrote:
Hey Jim,
Jim Fulton wrote:
Bobo is a light-weight framework for creating WSGI web applications.
Do you know if there are plans/possibilities to make the routing
part of Bobo available for other frameworks
I'm working on another project,
Re Jim's summary of URL routing
...I hope this helps ...
It helped me. Interesting summary. Thanks.
I'm all for making things as simple and explicit
as possible (at least as an optional or default behavior)
and it looks like Bobo is much better
than many other approaches in supporting simple
On 2009-06-18, Aaron Watters arw1...@yahoo.com wrote:
--- On Wed, 6/17/09, Sergey Schetinin mal...@gmail.com wrote:
When considering webapps and what urls they should handle
it seems
like the same should apply -- webapps define contained
blocks of
functionality and the task of
