On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 4:42 PM, PJ Eby <p...@telecommunity.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 12:12 AM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I am not speaking about websockets. You could use it for SSE, or some > apps > > could use the Upgrade header to upgrade from http to their own protocol > > etc... The only discussion i saw about websockets are about the addition > of > > an async api or an external api. I am not describing that. I am speaking > > about providing a low level abstraction like wsgi.input but adding to it > the > > support of output. (I was referring to wsgi.multithread...). This low > level > > interface would allow anyone to provide its own implementation(server) or > > usage (application) still acting as a *gateway* . > > It sounds like you may be looking for something like this: > > https://gist.github.com/pjeby/62e3892cd75257518eb0 > > It's a proposed standard protocol for breaking out of WSGI from inside > of a WSGI application, to access other protocols. It doesn't deal > with the details of any particular upgraded protocol, it merely > provides an "upgrade to specifed protocol" API and a way to safely > pass it through arbitrary middleware. The `wsgi.upgrades` environment > key is used to list available protocols. The idea of a standardised protocol escape is indeed interesting, though I'm not so keen on the idea of making triply nested functions a requirement for something like this. How would you see this interacting with potential asynchronous frameworks/reactors? The WebOb example only reacts to events also coming from within a WebSocket abstraction, but what if I wanted to e.g. send a message on database save? How would my application manage to trigger the WebSocket, in another thread or process, to do that? Andrew
_______________________________________________ Web-SIG mailing list Web-SIG@python.org Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/archive%40mail-archive.com
