Comments on: Python web developpement: the dilemma / Act 2 http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html Titanium Exposé Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:42:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Ian Bicking http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html#comment-538 Ian Bicking Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-538 <p>SkunkWeb is actually not as bound to its templates as it might seem. I was confused by this too -- I think the <em>documentation</em> is very focused on the templates, but if you ignore those parts you might start seeing how it can work without them.</p> <p>I've started looking at mod_python for some more advanced Apache development, but it still scares me for a full application. Generally I think of Apache as a fail-safe application that I don't have to worry about. I fear (though this may be unfounded) that mod_python could make Apache unstable. I certainly don't want to restart Apache because my application messed up the Python interpreter, but it seems like that can happen.</p> SkunkWeb is actually not as bound to its templates as it might seem. I was confused by this too — I think the documentation is very focused on the templates, but if you ignore those parts you might start seeing how it can work without them.

I’ve started looking at mod_python for some more advanced Apache development, but it still scares me for a full application. Generally I think of Apache as a fail-safe application that I don’t have to worry about. I fear (though this may be unfounded) that mod_python could make Apache unstable. I certainly don’t want to restart Apache because my application messed up the Python interpreter, but it seems like that can happen.

]]> By: Jkx http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html#comment-539 Jkx Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-539 <p>I'm ok with you Ian, Apache is quite rock-solid app. I found some issues with Apache2 but fixed right now. Mod_python really seems to be stable, even on really heavy load. But yes, I think we should look what happend when an interpreter ooops, segfault or other.</p> <p>In the other hand, having to monitor only one app isn't too much hard, but monitoring a bunch of differents servers can be a bit painfull.</p> I’m ok with you Ian, Apache is quite rock-solid app. I found some issues with Apache2 but fixed right now. Mod_python really seems to be stable, even on really heavy load. But yes, I think we should look what happend when an interpreter ooops, segfault or other.

In the other hand, having to monitor only one app isn’t too much hard, but monitoring a bunch of differents servers can be a bit painfull.

]]> By: Alan Kennedy http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html#comment-540 Alan Kennedy Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-540 I think you should check out WSGI, the new unified python web standard. If you look closely, I think you'll find that it addresses all of your concerns. <br /> <br /> http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0333.html <br /> I think you should check out WSGI, the new unified python web standard. If you look closely, I think you’ll find that it addresses all of your concerns.

http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0333.html

]]> By: Jkx http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html#comment-541 Jkx Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-541 <p>Except that recent posts on twisted.web mailing list say that Twisted doesn't feet very well in WSGI.. so no support in a near future (hum not definitive right now but .. )</p> <p>-- Bye Bye</p> Except that recent posts on twisted.web mailing list say that Twisted doesn’t feet very well in WSGI.. so no support in a near future (hum not definitive right now but .. )

– Bye Bye

]]> By: Hendrik http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html#comment-542 Hendrik Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-542 Give CherryPy(2) a try. It's very light-weight, treats your web applications as, yes, applications, and stays out of the way in regards to templating engines, object stores and the likes. Give CherryPy(2) a try. It’s very light-weight, treats your web applications as, yes, applications, and stays out of the way in regards to templating engines, object stores and the likes.

]]> By: exarkun http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html#comment-543 exarkun Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-543 Twisted isn't nearly as flamebaity as, say, decorators, or even ternary operators >:) <br /> <br /> There is actually a Twisted WSGI implementation already (or as close to one as you can be before PEP 333 is finalized).  However, your characterization may be accurate for all intents and purposes: WSGI applications need to be written quite carefully or in a particular way to be runnable in the single-process/single-threaded/persistent mode (one of 8 modes WSGI mandates).  Applications written for any of the other 7 configurations likely will not work well when run with twisted.web. <br /> Twisted isn’t nearly as flamebaity as, say, decorators, or even ternary operators >:)

There is actually a Twisted WSGI implementation already (or as close to one as you can be before PEP 333 is finalized).  However, your characterization may be accurate for all intents and purposes: WSGI applications need to be written quite carefully or in a particular way to be runnable in the single-process/single-threaded/persistent mode (one of 8 modes WSGI mandates).  Applications written for any of the other 7 configurations likely will not work well when run with twisted.web.

]]> By: Ian Bicking http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html#comment-544 Ian Bicking Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-544 The recent Twisted talk on WSGI is really about WSGI supporting Twisted applications, not the Twisted server. I think everyone is fairly comfortable with the server part, but writing portable asynchronous applications is up in the air, and very possibly won't be supported by WSGI 1.0. The recent Twisted talk on WSGI is really about WSGI supporting Twisted applications, not the Twisted server. I think everyone is fairly comfortable with the server part, but writing portable asynchronous applications is up in the air, and very possibly won’t be supported by WSGI 1.0.

]]> By: Justin http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html#comment-545 Justin Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-545 <p>Hi :-) I posted a comment in here a while ago when you were talking about web stuff. Have a look at this:</p> <p><a class="reference" href="http://www.myghty.org/">http://www.myghty.org/</a></p> <p>It has a few bugs right now, but for the most part it just works, and makes it a piece of cake to write certain types of pages.</p> Hi :-)
I posted a comment in here a while ago when you were talking about web stuff. Have a look at this:

http://www.myghty.org/

It has a few bugs right now, but for the most part it just works, and makes it a piece of cake to write certain types of pages.

]]> By: Alan Green http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html#comment-546 Alan Green Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-546 I've had a good experience CherryPy, Cheetah and SQLObject together. Even though the three products are separate technically, they work surprisingly well together. I’ve had a good experience CherryPy, Cheetah and SQLObject together. Even though the three products are separate technically, they work surprisingly well together.

]]> By: Hendrik http://www.larsen-b.com/Article/160.html#comment-547 Hendrik Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-547 <p>Here is a small CherryPy2 + SQLObject + Cheetah example:</p> <p><a class="reference" href="http://svn.mans.de/cherrypy/cp2/branches/cp2-hendrik/Tutorial/bonus-sqlobject.py">http://svn.mans.de/cherrypy/cp2/branches/cp2-hendrik/Tutorial/bonus-sqlobject.py</a></p> <p>Note that using inline templates probably isn't what you want to be doing in "real" projects, but this is really just an example.</p> Here is a small CherryPy2 + SQLObject + Cheetah example:

http://svn.mans.de/cherrypy/cp2/branches/cp2-hendrik/Tutorial/bonus-sqlobject.py

Note that using inline templates probably isn’t what you want to be doing in "real" projects, but this is really just an example.

]]>