[Web-SIG] Declaring PEP 3333 accepted (was: PEP 444 != WSGI 2.0)

[Graham Dumpleton]

The version at:

http://svn.python.org/projects/peps/trunk/pep-3333.txt

still shows:

        elif not headers_sent:
             # Before the first output, send the stored headers
             status, response_headers = headers_sent[:] = headers_set
             sys.stdout.write('Status: %s\r\n' % status)
             for header in response_headers:
                 sys.stdout.write('%s: %s\r\n' % header)
             sys.stdout.write('\r\n')

so not using buffer there and also not converting strings written for
headers to bytes.

Graham

On 7 January 2011 17:00, Graham Dumpleton <graham.dumpleton at gmail.com> wrote:
> Stupid question first. When running 2to3 on the example CGI code, why
> would it throw back the following. Is this indicative of anything else
> that needs to be changed to satisfy some Python 3 thing. The list()
> bit seems redundant, but I don't know what the other stuff is about.
>
> --- xx.py (original)
> +++ xx.py (refactored)
> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
>     return u.encode(enc, esc).decode('iso-8859-1')
>
>  def run_with_cgi(application):
> -    environ = {k: wsgi_string(v) for k,v in os.environ.items()}
> +    environ = {k: wsgi_string(v) for k,v in list(os.environ.items())}
>     environ['wsgi.input']        = sys.stdin
>     environ['wsgi.errors']       = sys.stderr
>     environ['wsgi.version']      = (1, 0)
> @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@
>             try:
>                 if headers_sent:
>                     # Re-raise original exception if headers sent
> -                    raise exc_info[0], exc_info[1], exc_info[2]
> +                    raise exc_info[0](exc_info[1]).with_traceback(exc_info[2])
>             finally:
>                 exc_info = None     # avoid dangling circular ref
>         elif headers_set:
>
>
>
>
> On 7 January 2011 16:58, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 9:47 PM, James Y Knight <foom at fuhm.net> wrote:
>>> On Jan 6, 2011, at 11:30 PM, P.J. Eby wrote:
>>>> At 09:51 AM 1/7/2011 +1100, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
>>>>> Is that the last thing or do I need to go spend some time and write my
>>>>> own CGI/WSGI bridge for Python 3 based on my own Python 2 one I have
>>>>> lying around and just do some final validation checks with a parallel
>>>>> implementation as a sanity check to make sure we got everything? This
>>>>> might be a good idea anyway.
>>>>
>>>> It would.  In the meantime, though, I've checked in the two-line change to add .buffer in.  ;-)
>>>
>>> So does that mean PEP 3333 can be accepted now?
>>
>> TBH I've totally lost track. Hopefully PJE and Graham can tell you...
>>
>> --
>> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
>>
>