WSGI2: write callable?
Robert Collins <[email protected]> Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:32:24 +1200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.python.web |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAJ3HoZ2X+TdGoo9R9b=J6d3w_VW+boGWnYxdm=xOsC7GqCnUzA@mail.gmail.com> |
Is the write callable still needed? Its documented as a undesirable thunk in PEP-3333; is there a good reason to keep it, or can we make start_response return None and require the use of a generator to supply content for the body? (Remembering that for backwards compatibility we're going to write an adapter, and a generator adapter is straightforward (if tedious) using a threading.Queue). I haven't done a survey, but I don't recall seeing anything except bespoke WSGI code that used the write interface - all the frameworks I've seen in some time use the iterator protocol. So I propose we drop the write callable, and include a queue based implementation in the adapter for PEP-3333 code. -Rob -- Robert Collins <[email protected]> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud _______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list [email protected] Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/gcpw-web-sig%40m.gmane.org