[Python-Dev] CGI module [was: New Subscriber]

[Steven Majewski]

[ OK. This is an old thread, but it's a new concern for me.
   I was researching to see what the current state of things was
   before making any public comments. I though I might as well provide
   this background to Dave Hastings, and also ask anyone involved in 
those
   earlier threads if there has been any more recent work on this that
   I might have missed. It looks like there was a flurry of discussion
   about this last fall but nothing seems to have come of it. ]

On May 7, 2004, at 12:33 AM, Dave Hastings wrote:

>  [ ... ] The project that was decided upon, with the advice of the 
> Professor, was to make a CGIpm python module that reflected CGI.pm for 
> perl.  We noticed that there is a current cgi module for python and 
> even a cgipm module.  These modules are very useful, but did not 
> include all the functions that CGI.pm for perl provides.  It turns out 
> that my Professor really likes python and would have loved to see a 
> CGIpm python module for python that was like the CGI.pm module for 
> perl. [ ... ]


Dave,

	It's been a few years since I needed to do any cgi programming in 
Python.
	When I recently had to dig into it, I was SHOCKED to discover what a 
mess
	the current cgi module is. ( My second shock was when I looked at the 
source
	to try to figure things out, and discovered my name there at the top! 
;-(

	It seems to be one of those things that just grew wild and didn't get 
much pruning.
	Mike McLay at NIST did the first version.
	I made some changes, but tried to keep backwards compatibility.
	Someone else came along and created a new set of interfaces, which 
both added
	and lost some functionality, but kept the older versions around for 
compatibility.
	( I couldn't seem to get the new, improved version to do what I 
wanted, so I
	  had to fall back on using the old compatability version! )

	None of them seem very nice to use.
	Probably one of the few places where Python is 'uglier' than perl.
	And searching various Python archives, I find a history of similar 
complaints.


Among the "Deferred, Abandoned, Withdrawn, and Rejected PEPs" is:

PEP 222 (Dec 2000):  http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0222.html

which first proposes dumping the cgi module and starting over again:

>  The cgi.py module would be deprecated.  (XXX A new module or
>     package name hasn't been chosen yet: 'web'?  'cgilib'?)

... and a partial outline of a proposed interface.

( along with: Extended HTTP functionality and WEBDAV:
	http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0268.html )


In the Sept. 2003 Python-Dev archives:
See the thread that begins with Subject: "[Python-Dev] Improving the 
CGI module":
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-September/038128.html


And the next month, a similar discussion picked up in the Web-SIG
mailing list. See Web-SIG October 2003 Archives:
http://mail.python.org/pipermail/web-sig/2003-October/thread.html

See the many messages concerning "Form field dictionaries" , as well
as several other threads in that months archive.


As far as I can tell, all of those threads died out without any actual
code being produced. However, they do give a good enumeration of what's
wrong with the current cgi module and what's needed in a new module.

Please let me know if there is any more current history I've missed
in my search. ( I've been out of the python-dev loop for a while! )

I guess  the Web-SIG is the best place for any further discussion.
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/web-sig



Dave: I'm not sure that following CGI.pm is the best possible design,
but I'ld like to see what you're planning. If nothing else is happening
on this front, I may be able to take a swing at it when I return from my
vacation.



-- Steve Majewski