werehuman
11.03.2011 06:32 lithium
http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2010/5/25/wsgi-o... оказывается, все очень плохо.
«Right now I'm a little bit afraid we end up with a specification that requires use to do the encode/decode/encode/decode dance just because the standard library and a limitation on the bytes object makes us do. Because one thing is for certain: ASCII and bytes are here to stay. Nobody can change the protocols that are in use, and even those would on the very bottom have to be based on bytes. And if the tools to work with them are not good enough in Python 3 we will see the problems with that on multiple levels, not just WSGI (Databases, email, and more).»
Поросенок Петр должен смотреть в сторону RoR и Node.js?
Только асм и только хардкор :coolface:
> Только пхп и только хардкор
fxd
Короче, линакс^Wпейтон3 еще не готов для десктопа^Wразработки.
быть может никогда не будет готов
Но он хотя бы существует, в отличие от сферических пхп6 и перл6, например.
ПАЦАНЫ ВСЕ НОРМУЛЬ, ПАЦАН К УСПЕХУ ИДЕТ
I am happy to accept a quasi-unicode support as well and will port Werkzeug over to it. But it's probably still the time to improve the specification and language that everybody is happy.
The reason why Python 3 is not as good as it could be, is that far too few people look at it. It is clear that the future of Python will be Python 3 and that there are no intentions of make other releases than Python 2.7, so to make the process less painful it's necessary to start playing with it now.
So I encourage everyone to play with Python 3, the spec, the standard library so that there is more input. Maybe the bytes issue does look like I think it is, maybe it's not. But if only a four people are discussing the issue, there is too few input to make rational decisions.
В общем, "в жаббере никого нет потому, что в жаббере никого нет".
Я уже подумываю по поводу своего языка с блекджеком и всем остальным, но, думаю, для серверных развлечений пока буду юзать окамль, питон и луа, ибо остальное вообще пиздец.