[Web-SIG] PEP 444 != WSGI 2.0

[Alice Bevan–McGregor]

On 2011-01-02 11:14:00 -0800, Chris McDonough said:
>> I'd suggest we just embrace it, adding minor tweaks as necessary, until 
>> we reach some sort of technical impasse it doesn't address.

Async is one area that 3333 does not cover, and that by not having a 
standard which incorporates async means competing, incompatible 
solutions have been created.

On 2011-01-02 12:00:39 -0800, Guido van Rossum said:
> Actually that does sound like an opinion on the technical merits. I 
> can't tell though, because I'm not familiar enough with PEP 444 to know 
> what the critical differences are compared to PEP 3333. Could someone 
> summarize?

Async, distinction between byte strings (type returned by socket.read), 
native strings, and unicode strings, thorough unicode decoding (moving 
some of the work from middleware to the server), simplified call syntax 
(no more start_response), and clear, consice language with easy 
references via numbered lists.

The async part is an idea in my head that I really do need to write 
down, clarified with help from agronholm on IRC.  The futures PEP is 
available as a pypi installable module, is core in 3.2, and seems to 
provide a simple enough abstract (duck-typed) interface that it should 
be usable as a basis for async in PEP 444.

There are parts I need to add back, of course.  file_wrapper, examples, 
rationale, and references being a few of the items not yet rewritten.

	- Alice.