> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > Why not add this to cgi.py instead? > > Because that would seem to defeat most of the point. > > The point was to provide an instant, effortless improvement for all > of the Python CGI scripts out there. If programmers have to manually > edit all of their CGI scripts to insert > > import sys, cgitb > sys.excepthook = cgitb.excepthook > > then it's just as annoying as inserting > > import sys > sys.stderr = sys.stdout > > I don't want people to have to edit every single script. You misunderstand. You proposed a few lines that would automatically do this in site.py, which is always imported. I propose to add those same lines to cgi.py, so that any code that imports cgi.py *automatically* has he feature enabled. I assume that all CGI scripts have an import of cgi. There are non-CGI scripts that import cgi, but those will be protected by the check for an environment variable that you propose. > > I don't like new additions that are > > irrelevant for most apps (CGI is a tiny niche for Python IMO). > > I think this is where our perceptions differ. I think of CGI as > the application that totally "made" Perl, and as the quickest, easiest > way that many beginners get early payoff from a scripting language. Yeah. But it's not doing that for Python IMO. Most Python apps (even those that do web stuff) are not CGI apps. > My impression is that it has been a big "hook" for bringing people to > Perl and Python -- it's the shortest path to building and deploying > something useful to a huge and unlimited audience. > > Wouldn't you say there are more Python CGI programmers out there > than, say, Zope developers? Or think of it like this: what fraction > of Web developers are CGI programmers, and what fraction of those > use Python? I don't want Python to become a wannabe CGI language, and I don't want to make choices that benefit CGI programmers to the detriment of others (CGI is actually a pretty lame way of producing active web content). Python is a decent language for CGI, but Perl is the established standard and then there's PHP which also has way more users than Python. > Maybe i'm wrong? I welcome more opinions from others -- how do you > see people coming to Python? What's the first "real" thing they do > with Python that motivates them to try it? All sorts of stuff. Using NumPy. GUI apps. Database apps. Unix scripting. App steering. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4