On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 6:26 AM, Alice Bevan–McGregor
wrote:
> Warning: this assumes we're running on bizzaro-world PEP 444 that mandates
> applications are generators. Please do not dismiss this idea out of hand
> but give it a good look and maybe some feedback. ;)
>
> --
>
> Howdy!
>
> I've fin
> There is practically no reason for doing so; esp. considering that I've
> managed to write a 2k/3k polygot server that is more performant out of the
> box than any other WSGI HTTP server I've come across and is far simpler in
> implementation than most of the ones I've come across with roughly
>
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Robert Brewer wrote:
> Paul Davis wrote:
>> > Since the major stumbling block, irrespective of other changes,
>> > to any sort of agreement is still bytes vs unicode
>>
>> I ran into this while I was attempting to put toget
lso not a big fan of automatically applying a default encoding to
*any* of the bytes read in an HTTP request. After contemplating for
awhile I came to the conclusion that header names are really part of
the request itself, where as the other keys in the environ are
metadata about the request. Having
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 12:37 AM, Graham Dumpleton
wrote:
> On 19 July 2010 03:19, P.J. Eby wrote:
>> At 01:01 PM 7/18/2010 +1000, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
>>>
>>> This is on the basis that if people are going to have to rewrite their
>>> code
>>> a fair bit to handle bytes everywhere,
>>
>> What
On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Graham Dumpleton
wrote:
> On 16 April 2010 11:41, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
>> I haven't read what you have done yet
>
> And still haven't. Don't know when I will get a chance to do so.
>
> Two points from a quick scan of emails.
>
> 1. The following section of PEP
