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

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

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).

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?!

No, that's not what he's saying... and I don't know if you realize this, but the author, P.J. Eby, is the same guy who wrote the original WSGI spec.

> 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.

"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've ever had to do a website for a small biz, you typically find that either a) you end up doing the copy or b) the site never gets finished (and you don't get paid, or if you do get paid, you get to put an empty site in your portfolio). Good copy-writing is thus very handy skill to have (and this guy, in his eBay listing at least, absolutely nails it... the £9k bottom line speaks for itself).

Truer words were never spoken. "What's that, you expect me to produce 40 pages of technical-but-intelligible copy for procedures on your plastic surgery website? But that's why I gave you [insert CMS of choice here], so your people could log in and edit that themselves...my god man, I'm a web developer, not a medical research technician...what's that? You don't have people? Sigh."

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.