New user's initial thoughts / criticisms of Python
python.list at tim.thechases.com
Sat Nov 9 21:39:29 CET 2013
On 2013-11-10 01:27, Chris Angelico wrote:
> > Is everyone happy with the way things are? Could anyone recommend
> > a good, high level language for CGI work? Not sure if I'm going
> > to be happy with Perl (ahhh, get him, he's mentioned Perl and is
> > a heretic!) or Python. I would very much value any constructive
> > criticism or insights.
> If by CGI you actually literally mean CGI, then most of us don't
> have any experience with it.
While there might be some die-hards in the group that would accuse
you (the OP) of heresy, most folks here are pragmatics that will shrug
go for it. We just can't help you much unless it's Python". Much
like I'm a vi/vim guy, but if emacs/Sublime/notepad/nano/ed/edlin/cat
works for you, then go for it.
Most of the major frameworks *can* be run as CGI (rather than FastCGI
or WSGI), but performance is usually abysmal because the entire
program is restarted for each request (whereas FCGI/WSGI have
long-running processes that exact the spin-up cost once). It's more
of a party trick or proof-of-concept than anything you'd want to put
into high-traffic production. Django, CherryPy, Flask,
web.py, web2py all support deploying in a CGI environment (it
looks like Pylons/Pyramid might too, but I couldn't scare up a link
for explicit directions).
I'm personally partial to Django because it offers so much out of
the box, but I've done work in a couple of the others too (doing some
CherryPy contract work currently).
More information about the Python-list