Phillip J. Eby ha scritto: > [...] >> There is also a little problem in the "The start_response() Callable" >> chapter, in this phrase: >> >> """The start_response callable must not actually transmit the response >> headers. Instead, it must store them for the server or gateway to >> transmit only after the first iteration of the application return value >> that yields a non-empty string, or upon the application's first >> invocation of the write() callable""" >> >> >> From this it seems that the response headers should be transmitted >> after the first invocation of the write() callable, even if it returns >> an empty string, but this is in contradiction with the following phrase: >> >> """In other words, response headers must not be sent until there is >> actual body data available, or until the application's returned iterable >> is exhausted""" > > There is no sane reason to call write() with an empty string, so I don't > really see a conflict here. >
Yes, there are no sane reasons, but it is still not explicitly forbidden. > Please note that both write() and iteration in the normal case should be > sending the entire response body in a single call or yield. Multiple > yields or write() calls should ONLY be used when streaming output is > *required*: i.e. server push or sending large files. > > (In addition, write() is intended strictly for legacy apps and > frameworks only; new code should use iteration only, especially as WSGI > 2 will drop the start_response() and write() functions altogether.) > > By the way: isn't it better to first release a WSGI 1.1 before jumping to a (incompatible) WSGI 2.0? Manlio Perillo _______________________________________________ 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
