inarru

wsgi apps can be wrapped so that they can be called by wsgi-lite middleware. see the lighten() decorator.

> I don't know if you realize this, but the author, P.J. Eby, is the same guy who wrote the original WSGI spec.

yup (though to conclude anything from that fact is a clear fallacy).

I've realised that what I actually disliked most was his blog-post and not the actual project (I've used identical shims to wsgi-lite by choice over the years).

"CAN'T REPLACE WSGI WITH SOMETHING BETTER? CHALLENGE ACCEPTED"

"WSGI IS DEAD" (Except when it isn't.)

I realise that the above was probably done for facetious editorial reasons rather than his actual intention with the lib. He hasn't really replaced wsgi, he admits should only be used wherever appropriate

Armin uses the async point in part to give technical reasons why WSGI can't really be replaced in full, before concluding that he thinks replacing WSGI for purported notions of pluggable utopia is a red-herring anyway before posing the question of any WSGI replacement: does this really '[make] frameworks work better with each other?'

I don't think PJ really tackles any of that.

well, that's not quite all. if you're writing middleware you sometimes have to write a some (mostly reusable) extra code to pass as the start_response() to other wsgi callables. (to access the headers and/or munge anything sent by .write() -- or disallow .write() entirely).

the only benefit is not using start_response() before returning your data.

is it just me or is this completely flawed as a response to armin's article?

- Armin: "you can't replace the 'bad' bits of WSGI for asynchronous apps without using some python extension like greenlet"

- to which this article replies: "Armin is wrong, i've replaced WSGI! PS: if you're an asynchronous server you have to use greenlet!"

see 'known limitations'

basically, in trying to challenge armin he's proved him right. and he does this without a hint of irony?!

"And yes I'm the same idiot that sold a used wetsuit on eBay for £9,000."

Ah, I remember this!

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160...

very similar, but an ebay listing not a portfolio website. he certainly knows how to copywrite in a way that gets him traffic.

If you spent 1% of the time you did writing this comment researching your misguided accusations you would realize that xcode 4 isn't free and downloadable for registered (free to register) Apple Developers.

"for members of the developer program (which is a free membership)."

no, it's only free for members of the paid developer program. free members who try and download it are given a link to the appstore or an option to purchase the yearly membership.