[Web-SIG] Alternative to threading.local, based on the stack
ianb at colorstudy.com
Mon Jul 7 19:54:28 CEST 2008
Manlio Perillo wrote:
> Ian Bicking ha scritto:
>> Manlio Perillo wrote:
> I'm adding web-sig in Cc.
>>> I'm developing a WSGI framework with all these (and other) ideas:
>>> Its still not documented, so I have not yet made an official
>>> The main design goal is to keep the level of the interface as low
>>> level as possible.
>>> I don't like additional interfaces (like Request and Response)
>>> objects around the WSGI dictionary, and I don't like frameworks like
>>> Django that completely hides the WSGI interface.
>> Have you tried webob? My first run as Paste avoided wrappers around
>> those objects, but an object interface has been very helpful.
> I have not tried it, but I have read the code (as I have read the code
> of Paste).
> In principle I'm against using additional interface, and one of the
> reason I wrote wsgix is to have a prof of concept, for trying to
> understand if it is feasible to write a WSGI application using an
> alternative framework.
> wsgix (+ mod_wsgi for Nginx) has the same role as Paste, but I have
> decided to use a rather different approach.
> As an example, in Paste you have choosed to using config dictionary for
> middleware configuration, that is, you have middleware factories.
I think this is a red herring. WebOb specifically doesn't do anything
related to configuration or the setup of the stack. What it does do is
expires = http.format_time(0)
environ, headers, name, '', expires=expires,
which would be resp.delete_cookie(name) (well, cookie_domain seems to be
derived from a setting, but that's mostly unrelated). This isn't a
particularly substantial difference, but these small conveniences add up.
Ian Bicking : ianb at colorstudy.com : http://blog.ianbicking.org
More information about the Web-SIG