[Tim] >> BTW, I'm not a web guy: in what way is HTTP chunked transfer mode >> viewed as being flawed? Everything I ever read about it seemed to >> think it was A Good Idea.
[Martin] > It just didn't work for some time, see e.g. > > http://bugs.python.org/issue1486335 > http://bugs.python.org/issue1966 > http://bugs.python.org/issue1312980 > http://bugs.python.org/issue3761 > > It's not that the protocol was underspecified - just the implementation > was "brittle" (if I understand that word correctly). "Easily broken in catastrophic ways" is close, like a chunk of peanut brittle can shatter into a gazillion pieces if you drop it on the floor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brittle_(food) Or like the infinite loops in some of the bug reports, "just because" some server screwed up the protocol a little at EOF. But for pickling there are a lot fewer picklers than HTML transport creators ;-) So I'm not much worried about that. Another of the bug reports amounted just to that urllib, at first, didn't support chunked transfer mode at all. > And I believe (and agree with you) that the cause for this "difficult > to implement" property is that the framing is in putting framing "in the > middle" > of the stack (i.e. not really *below* pickle itself, but into pickle > but below the opcodes - just like http chunked transfer is "in" http, > but below the content encoding). It's certainly messy that way. But doable, and I expect the people working on it are more than capable enough to get it right, by at latest the 4th try ;-) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com