ANN: Snakelets 1.35 (simple-to-use web app server with dynamic pages)
Irmen de Jong
irmen at -nospam-remove-this-xs4all.nl
Tue Oct 12 13:40:32 EDT 2004
Alan Kennedy wrote:
> Ah, one of the key questions! And the answer is that, iff you write
> Snakelets according to the WSGI API, then it should be easily usable on
> asynchronous architectures. This is achieved through the use of python
> iterators (e.g. generators), so that application frameworks generate
> content on demand, when the server/gateway is ready to transmit them.
Interesting idea. I haven't thought about generating output this way.
> It will all become clearer if you read the WSGI spec.
Will do :)
> So basically, porting Snakelets to WSGI would mean splitting Snakelets
> into two parts, the server part and the framework part, with all
> communications between the two governed by WSGI. Both parts would then
> become interoperable with other WSGI components. Neat, eh?
Sounds neat, but I think this is a hard thing to do for me.
Anyway we'll see. First have to read the WSGI doc thoroughly.
> But the upside of Snakelets using generators is that I think you will
> find that Snakelets architecture fits WSGI extremely well. Although WSGI
> supports an old-style imperative API, i.e. where input and output is
> explicitly read/written to IO channels, it is really designed so that
> applications/frameworks supply content on demand, through an iterator
> interface.
Hm, that's not what I meant by "using generators". I'm using them
for other things, but not the generation of output...
Thanks for answering my questions.
off-to-read-the-WSGI'ly yours,
Irmen.
More information about the Python-list
mailing list