On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Gary Grossman <[email protected]> wrote:
This might be one of those instances where it would be helpful for > implementation to lead specification. Unicorn is one of the leading > servers of its genre, if not the leader. If you supported a switch > that made the encoding regime more sane, I think other popular servers > like Thin and Passenger would swiftly follow and it might re-energize > the discussion about getting encodings into the Rack spec once and > for all, and give a base for experimentation and iteration for > getting the encodings in the spec right. > I agree with Gary here. It's often too easy to decide to preserve the status quo because things work well enough -- and then, eventually, time catches up with you and it no longer does. If Gary's proposal makes sense, and improves matters without doing significant harm -- despite it not adhering to the letter of Rack compliance as it is currently specified today -- it would represent a major step forward if implemented in Unicorn. (And as Gary suggested, the specification and other implementors will probably catch up by necessity if the behavior proves beneficial.) The first step is to prove it's worth shaking the tree with some benchmarks, though. :) --Michael
