On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 1:37 PM, <chris.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, 17 Sep 2010, Ionel Maries Cristian wrote: > > I feel this spec puts too much burden on applications - having to process >> all those byte strings and even having to add Content-Length even for >> naive >> buffered-body apps. >> > > The Content-Length requirement is a big killer for me. I'm usually > generating content in apps, rather deep in a stack of middleware-like > pieces that may or may not be looking at or modifying that content. > I don't want to a) have to unwind my generators at each level b) > reset the content-length here there and everywhere. > > It could be I'm doing it completely wrong, but it works rather > nicely. >
I'm unclear what exactly you guys are reacting to. This? - The server must not inject an additional Content-Length header by guessing the length from the response iterable. This must be set by the application itself in all situations. I'm also not sure what motivated this particular change, but I don't have any opinion one way or the other. -- Ian Bicking | http://blog.ianbicking.org
_______________________________________________ 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
