[Web-SIG] Latest WSGI Draft

[Phillip J. Eby]

At 10:43 AM 8/23/04 -0500, Ian Bicking wrote:
>Phillip J. Eby wrote:
>>>Well, let's say mod_python adds two extensions.  One is to do a local 
>>>redirect, the other is to do a recursive call.  The local redirect would 
>>>be in wsgi.extensions (if it existed), but the recursive call would 
>>>not.  With wsgi.extensions, the middleware would eliminate the local 
>>>redirect, and the application would be forced to use the recursive call 
>>>and write out the result of that.  Which is what you would want, because 
>>>then the middleware would have an opportunity to modify the output.
>>
>>In that case, why not have the local_redirect function require the 
>>start_response callable as one of its parameters?  It can then refuse if 
>>the output has been captured by middleware.
>
>How can it tell output is going to be captured?

If 'start_response' is a different 'start_response' than the one it gave 
the application.  A middleware component has no need to replace 
'start_response' unless it needs to control the output in some way.  Thus, 
using any extension API that allows direct output would be bypassing 
middleware in that case.