On 17-07-2010, chris.d...@gmail.com wrote: > On Fri, 16 Jul 2010, P.J. Eby wrote: > >> At 02:28 PM 7/16/2010 -0500, Ian Bicking wrote: >> There should be one, and preferably *only* one, obvious way to do it. >> >> And given that HTTP is inherently a bunch of bytes, bytes is the one obvious >> way. > > I think this makes sense. The thing which is assembling the WSGI > environment should do bytes and things further down the stack can > deal with it as they like. This aligns well with how I like to think > about such stuff: bytes on the outside, unicode on the inside. > > Given that app and frameworks developers can throw whatever keys > they like back into the environment, they can cope as they like.[1] > > What would be horrible is if there need to be multiple coping > strategies. Better to be able to say, "Oh it doesn't work? Try this > way to cope: remember it is bytes."
This thread is difficult to follow, but this make sense to me also. KISS -- William Dodé - http://flibuste.net Informaticien Indépendant _______________________________________________ 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
