Istvan Albert wrote:
>suppose one wants to return content created by two generators ... they
>could wrap it themselves into a single one but why not write it both to
>the response and let that iterate thru each,
>
>
What if they want three? :-). I should say that it's still looking
theoretical
> just can't imagine any practical application of this...
suppose one wants to return content created by two generators ... they
could wrap it themselves into a single one but why not write it both to
the response and let that iterate thru each,
if your code would support that it would end up be
Istvan Albert wrote:
>but it is not an arbitraty iterator one is writing to, it is the the
>HttpResponse, why couldn't it handle new content being added just
>because some content is present as an interator? once it exhausts the
>original iterator it could continue on (if new content was added af
but it is not an arbitraty iterator one is writing to, it is the the
HttpResponse, why couldn't it handle new content being added just
because some content is present as an interator? once it exhausts the
original iterator it could continue on (if new content was added after
it)
or why not let th
Istvan Albert wrote:
>2. I'm commenting here as an outsider, but looking at the patch it
>seems that the _is_string attribute is unnecessary, all it seems to be
>used only to forbid certain methods,
>
Yes, this is its intention.
> like writing, but why not let them
>happen?
>
>
As I already an
Two observations:
1. It is hard to believe that Django does not already do this ... it is
somewhat depressing to see that trivial behavior such as streaming
output was never implemented
2. I'm commenting here as an outsider, but looking at the patch it
seems that the _is_string attribute is unne
Ivan Sagalaev wrote:
>I'll create a ticket with a patch later today. I somehow missed that
>looking at the code may help people understand things :-)
>
>
Here it is: http://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/1569
Patches both for trunk and magic removal.
--~--~-~--~~~--
On Sat, 2006-04-01 at 09:06 +0400, Ivan Sagalaev wrote:
> Thanks for the reply, Malcolm!
>
> Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
>
> >A relatively minor point: I would prefer to leave something like this
> >method in place, since otherwise everybody has to implement it
> >themselves if they care about HTT
Thanks for the reply, Malcolm!
Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
>A relatively minor point: I would prefer to leave something like this
>method in place, since otherwise everybody has to implement it
>themselves if they care about HTTP compliance. The problem is the
>Accept-Charset header in the HTTP re
On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 15:47 +0400, Ivan Sagalaev wrote:
> I'm working on a patch (actually I use it for about a week locally) that
> allows one to put an iterator as a content for HttpResponse. This is
> intended primarily for large file-like objects that are fed to the user
> incrementally wit
I'm working on a patch (actually I use it for about a week locally) that
allows one to put an iterator as a content for HttpResponse. This is
intended primarily for large file-like objects that are fed to the user
incrementally without reading entirely into memory. This also allows to
invent s
11 matches
Mail list logo
