[Web-SIG] A 'shutdown' function in WSGI
Sylvain Hellegouarch
sh at defuze.org
Tue Feb 21 10:35:47 CET 2012
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Graham Dumpleton <
graham.dumpleton at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 21 February 2012 20:26, Simon Sapin <simon.sapin at exyr.org> wrote:
> > Le 21/02/2012 09:23, Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
> >
> >> Instead of having to provide two or three objects separately to a
> >> server, how about making the callbacks attributes of the application
> >> callable?
> >>
> >>
> >> can you show us an example ?
> >
> >
> > Proposal:
> >
> > Function-based:
> >
> > def startup():
> > return open_resource(something)
> >
> > def shutdown(resource):
> > resource.close()
> >
> > def application(environ, start_response):
> > # ...
> > return response_body
> >
> > application.startup = startup
> > application.shutdown = shutdown
> >
> > Class-based:
> >
> > class App(object):
> > def startup(self):
> > return open_resource(something)
> >
> > def shutdown(self, resource):
> > resource.close()
> >
> > def __call__(self, environ, start_response):
> > # ...
> > return response_body
> >
> > application = App()
> >
> > The return value of startup() can be any python object and is opaque to
> the
> > server. It is passed as-is to shutdown()
> >
> > startup() could take more parameters. Maybe the application (though can
> we
> > already have it as self for class-based or in a closure for
> function-based)
>
> You do realise you are just reinventing context managers?
>
> With this 'application' do requests.
>
> But then it was sort of suggested that was a bit too radical idea when
> I have mentioned viewing it that way before. :-(
>
>
One might wonder if having access to process management should be part of
WSGI in the first place.
--
- Sylvain
http://www.defuze.org
http://twitter.com/lawouach
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/web-sig/attachments/20120221/2ca52496/attachment.html>
More information about the Web-SIG
mailing list