[Web-SIG] WSGI uses

[tony at lownds.com]

>> If it's a second class citizen to the
>>iterator why not force all applications to provide their own buffering?
>
> I don't see what you mean about buffering.

s/buffering/write()/

An application framework can provide its own write() very easily

def app_framework(env, start_response):
  start_response(...)
  buffer = []
  write = buffer.append
  ...
  return buffer


> As for it being a second-class
> citizen, it certainly is.  But application frameworks that currently
> provide some analogue to write() in their API today, can't live without
> it.  So, the write() functionality has to be there or WSGI is DOA.
>
>

Ok

> What would this "more powerful API" consist of?  WSGI is a paper-thin
> abstraction of HTTP; that's its sole purpose.
>

One example: redirecting to a resource internal to the server (like
Location: for CGI)

I suppose you could use a specific status code or a header.

> Thus, it seems to me there are only servers and gateways.

Ok

-Tony