On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 4:53 PM, P.J. Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote: > At 04:08 PM 4/8/2010 +0200, Manlio Perillo wrote: >> >> Hi. >> >> Some time ago I objected the decision to remove start_response function >> from next version WSGI, using as rationale the fact that without >> start_callable, asynchronous extension are impossible to support. >> >> Now I have found that removing start_response will also make impossible >> to support coroutines (or, at least, some coroutines usage). >> >> Here is an example (this is the same example I posted few days ago): >> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/199202/ >> >> Forgetting about the write callable, the problem is that the application >> starts to yield data when tmpl.render_unicode function is called. >> >> Please note that this has *nothing* to do with asynchronus applications. >> The code should work with *all* WSGI implementations. >> >> >> In the pasted example, the Mako render_unicode function is "turned" into >> a generator, with a simple function that allows to flush the current >> buffer. >> >> >> Can someone else confirm that this code is impossible to support in WSGI >> 2.0? > > I don't understand why it's a problem. See my previous post here: > > http://mail.python.org/pipermail/web-sig/2009-September/003986.html > > for a sketch of a WSGI 1-to-2 converter. It takes a WSGI 1 application > callable as the input, and returns a WSGI 2 function. > where is WSGI 2 pep ? I would like to see it first rather than seeig different implementations.
- benoit _______________________________________________ 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
