[Web-SIG] PEP 444 (aka Web3)

Ionel Maries Cristian ionel.mc at gmail.com
Fri Sep 17 18:47:10 CEST 2010

I don't like this proposal at all. Besides having to go through the bytes
craziness the design is pretty backwards for middleware and asynchronous

Even the proxy_and_timing_support example in the PEP is broken for async or
streaming apps - it won't return the proper time (since it doesn't consume
the body iterable) and it will fail most of the times since you can't just
add a tuple to a iterable.

The missing requirement that middleware must yield at least an empty string
if they need more more information from the application iterable also breaks
async gateways that expect oob information from the app (for example cogen
can't be ported to this spec).

The removed requirement "middleware components *must not* block iteration
waiting for multiple values from an application iterable. If the middleware
needs to accumulate more data from the application before it can produce any
output, it *must* yield an empty string." also breaks async gateways/apps.

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.


On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 02:03, Chris McDonough <chrism at plope.com> wrote:

> A PEP was submitted and accepted today for a WSGI successor protocol
> named Web3:
> http://python.org/dev/peps/pep-0444/
> I'd encourage other folks to suggest improvements to that spec or to
> submit a competing spec, so we can get WSGI-on-Python3 settled soon.
> - C
> _______________________________________________
> Web-SIG mailing list
> Web-SIG at python.org
> Web SIG: http://www.python.org/sigs/web-sig
> Unsubscribe:
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/web-sig/ionel.mc%40gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/web-sig/attachments/20100917/7e76d169/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Web-SIG mailing list