At 06:58 PM 9/18/2009 -0500, Ian Bicking wrote:
What's wrong with this simpler approach to the conversion?
It's not compliant with the WSGI 1 spec, which calls for write() to be unbuffered.
On the one hand, you could say that anybody who gives a crap about the spec wouldn't use write() to begin with. But then, on the other, if we ignore the spec ourselves, we're hardly in a position to complain about their behavior. ;-)
Anyway, Graham raised the difficulty of making a compliant adapter as an argument for having a WSGI 1.1 rather than jumping straight to 2.0, and I just wanted to show that it's not that difficult in principle to make a fully WSGI 1.0-compliant 2-to-1 adapter, at least if you cheat and use greenlets to handle the less well-behaved WSGI 1 apps.
The hairiest bits of defining 2.0 have more to do with nailing down the whole bytes/unicode/native circus, the input stream API, etc... most of which I hope we can do in the errata for 1.0.
_______________________________________________ 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
