Added some actual content
This commit is contained in:
Andrew M. Kuchling
parent
91c2029e89
commit
518474ed77
121
pep-0222.txt
121
pep-0222.txt
|
|
@ -16,6 +16,127 @@ Abstract
|
|||
new features, new modules for tasks such as cookie support, or
|
||||
removal of obsolete code.
|
||||
|
||||
The intent is to incorporate the proposals emerging from this
|
||||
document into Python 2.1, due to be released in the first half of
|
||||
2001.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed Changes
|
||||
|
||||
This section lists changes that have been suggested, but about
|
||||
which no firm decision has yet been made. In the final version of
|
||||
this PEP, this section should be empty, as all the changes should
|
||||
be classified as accepted or rejected.
|
||||
|
||||
fcgi.py : A new module adding support for the FastCGI protocol
|
||||
|
||||
Better debugging support for CGIs from the Unix command line.
|
||||
Using Perl's CGI.pm [1], if you run a script from the command
|
||||
line, you can enter name=value pairs on standard input.
|
||||
cgimodel [2] provides this already.
|
||||
|
||||
Should the existing cgi.py be deprecated and everything moved into
|
||||
a 'web' or 'cgi' package? That would allow removing some
|
||||
backward-compatibility cruft.
|
||||
|
||||
cgi.py: keep_blank_values should be on by default. The 'if
|
||||
form.has_key()/if form[key].value' nested syntax is unnecessarily
|
||||
convoluted.
|
||||
|
||||
cgi.py: We should not be told to create our own subclass just so
|
||||
we can handle file uploads. As a practical matter, I have yet to
|
||||
find the time to do this right, so I end up reading cgi.py's temp
|
||||
file into, at best, another file. Some of our legacy code actually
|
||||
reads it into a second temp file, then into a final destination!
|
||||
And even if we did, that would mean creating yet another object
|
||||
with its __init__ call and associated overhead.
|
||||
|
||||
cgi.py: Ideally, the pseudo-dictionary syntax would go away. It
|
||||
seems to me that the main reason it is there is to accomodate
|
||||
|
||||
form['field'].file syntax. How about the following:
|
||||
form['field'] = '' #no values for key
|
||||
form['field'] = 'string' #one value in submission for key
|
||||
form['field'] = ['string', 'string', ....] #multiple values
|
||||
form['field'] = {'fileName':'remote/path',
|
||||
'binaryValue':'@UIHJBV29489erht...'} #one file
|
||||
form['field'] = [{'fileName':'remote/path',
|
||||
'binaryValue':'@UIHJBV29489erht...'},
|
||||
{'fileName':'another/path',
|
||||
'binaryValue':'7r7w7@@@@'}] #multiple files
|
||||
|
||||
cgi.py: I'd prefer "input" or "submission" for the suggested
|
||||
FieldStorage() name. The html page into which the data represented
|
||||
by FieldStorage() is input is commonly known as a "form", which
|
||||
means that when someone refers to "the form" you aren't always
|
||||
sure what they are talking about.
|
||||
|
||||
cgi.py: Allow a combination of query data and POST data.
|
||||
Currently, if there is POST data, then any query data encoded in
|
||||
the URL is ignored. It would be more convenient if the data from
|
||||
those two sources were merged into one dictionary. (XXX but is
|
||||
this standard at all?)
|
||||
|
||||
cgi.py: Currently, query data with no `=' are ignored. Even if
|
||||
keep_blank_values is set, queries like `...?value=&...' are
|
||||
returned with blank values but queries like `...?value&...' are
|
||||
completely lost. It would be great if such data were made
|
||||
available through the FieldStorage interface, either as entries
|
||||
with None as values, or in a separate list.
|
||||
|
||||
Higher-level frameworks: add something like Webware or Zope's
|
||||
HTTPReqest/HTTPResponse objects.
|
||||
|
||||
An HTML templating module. (But which one? There's no clear, or
|
||||
even vague, indication of which templating module to enshrine.)
|
||||
|
||||
Dictionary-related utility classes: NoKeyErrors (returns an empty
|
||||
string, never a KeyError), PartialStringSubstitution (returns
|
||||
the original key string, never a KeyError)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
New Modules
|
||||
|
||||
This section lists details about entire new packages or modules
|
||||
that should be added to the Python standard library.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Major Changes to Existing Modules
|
||||
|
||||
This section lists details of major changes to existing modules,
|
||||
whether in implementation or in interface. The changes in this
|
||||
section therefore carry greater degrees of risk, either in
|
||||
introducing bugs or a backward incompatibility.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Minor Changes to Existing Modules
|
||||
|
||||
This section lists details of minor changes to existing modules.
|
||||
These changes should have relatively small implementations, and
|
||||
have little risk of introducing incompatibilities with previous
|
||||
versions.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Rejected Changes
|
||||
|
||||
The changes listed in this section were proposed for Python 2.1,
|
||||
but were rejected as unsuitable. For each rejected change, a
|
||||
rationale is given describing why the change was deemed
|
||||
inappropriate.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Copyright
|
||||
|
||||
This document has been placed in the public domain.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
References and Footnotes
|
||||
|
||||
[1] CGI.pm:
|
||||
|
||||
[2] http://www.embl-heidelberg.de/~chenna/pythonpages/
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Local Variables:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue