Re: WSGI2: write callable?

On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Robert Collins
<[email protected]> wrote:
> So I propose we drop the write callable, and include a queue based
> implementation in the adapter for PEP-3333 code.

If you're dropping write(), then you might as well drop
start_response() altogether, and replace it with returning a (status,
headers, body-iterator) tuple, as in wsgi_lite (
https://github.com/pjeby/wsgi_lite ) or as found in other languages'
versions of WSGI.  (start_response+write was only ever needed in order
to support legacy apps, so other languages never bothered.)

wsgi_lite has a couple of other protocol extensions, namely the
'wsgi_lite.closing' environment key, flagging callables' supported
WSGI version (for transparent interop), and the argument binding
protocol, but for the most part these are orthogonal to the calling
schema.  I would suggest, however, that the calling protocol be
flagged in some way to allow easier interop.
_______________________________________________
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