不公正 [英] Being unjust
问题描述
我会对人们如何考虑将一个不同的Python web框架中的一个与Python发行版捆绑在一起感兴趣，这将是
就在那里。就像用于GUI编程的Tcl / Tk + Tkinter一样。不是我不是b $ b不信任别人自己做出合格的决定，或者我实际上相信一个单一的最佳解决方案。它更像是捆绑力量和注意力的象征性行动。
凯
2006年1月18日星期三03:27:56 -0800，Kay Schluehr写道：
我会对人们的想法感兴趣关于将一个不同的Python web框架与Python发行版捆绑在一起，这将是就在那里。就像用于GUI编程的Tcl / Tk + Tkinter一样。它不是我不相信人们自己做出合格的决定，或者我实际上相信一个单一的最佳解决方案。它更像是捆绑力量和注意力的象征性行动。
只要我不必听众多人争论
哪个框架获得首选地位，听起来对我来说是一个很好的举动。
-
史蒂文。
Kay Schluehr写道：
我对人们对捆绑其中一种不同的想法感兴趣使用Python发行版的Python webframeworks将只是在那里。就像用于GUI编程的Tcl / Tk + Tkinter一样。
如果你能找到一个相对稳定的，足够简单的初学者来
用简单的python代码做简单的事情，可以做简单的事情而不需要
a成熟的DB，如果有必要可以作为普通的CGI运行，我绝对是+1 。
（嗯。也许web.py符合规范？但这更像是一个库而不是一个框架 -
的工作，当然......）
< / F>
Fredrik Lundh写道：Kay Schluehr写道：
我会对人们对捆绑其中一个不同的Python webframeworks的想法感兴趣Python发行版将是就在那里。就像用于GUI编程的Tcl / Tk + Tkinter一样。
如果你能找到一个相对稳定，简单到足以让初学者用简单的python代码做简单的东西，就能做到简单的东西，不需要一个完整的数据库，如果有必要可以作为一个普通的CGI运行，我肯定是+1。
（嗯。也许是web.py符合规范？但这更像是一个库而不是一个框架
工作，当然......）
web.py很棒优势（据称）你可以将应用程序从CGI迁移到FastCGI，mod_python，WSGI。
它当然不算稳定 - 刚刚被释放。尽管如此，包括它在内的+1 b $ b包括它;-)
公平地说，建立一个图书馆而不是一个图书馆会更好
$ b标准库中的$ b框架。
有一些基本的哲学差异。在网络应用程序中，
使它成为一场宗教战争。这意味着将某些内容转化为
标准库很可能是导致讨论难以解决的问题。 *叹气*
我认为Ian Bickings方法（这个WSGI或粘贴??）是开发一个框架，它组件化Web应用程序的元素。 （我这是一个与框架一样的协议）。这意味着你在游戏开始时没有被锁定在设计决策中 - 并且
按照协议开发的
组件可以很容易地在
其他项目。
不幸的是，他们（他？）已经使API成为阻塞API（WSGI在
至少阻止） - 这意味着没有线程就不能使用它。所以
这里仍然存在一个基本的哲学问题。
其他框架如Django和turbogears不能（很容易）分享
为其他框架设计的部分应用程序。这将是非常难以实现的，包括一个在另一个包含在
标准库中。
一切顺利，
Fuzzyman
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/index.shtml
< / F>
I''d be interested in what people think about bundling one of the
diverse Python webframeworks with the Python distribution which will be
"just there" as like Tcl/Tk+Tkinter for GUI-programming. Its not that I
don''t trust people to make qualified decisions on their own or that I
actually believe in one single best solution. It''s more a symbolic
action of bundling forces and attention.
Kay
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 03:27:56 -0800, Kay Schluehr wrote:
I''d be interested in what people think about bundling one of the
diverse Python webframeworks with the Python distribution which will be
"just there" as like Tcl/Tk+Tkinter for GUI-programming. Its not that I
don''t trust people to make qualified decisions on their own or that I
actually believe in one single best solution. It''s more a symbolic
action of bundling forces and attention.
So long as I don''t have to listen to the hordes of people arguing about
which framework gets preferred status, it sounds like a good move to me.
--
Steven.
Kay Schluehr wrote:
I''d be interested in what people think about bundling one of the
diverse Python webframeworks with the Python distribution which will be
"just there" as like Tcl/Tk+Tkinter for GUI-programming.
if you can find one that''s relatively stable, simple enough to enable beginners to
do simple things with just a little python code, can do simple stuff without needing
a full-blown DB, and can run as an ordinary CGI if necessary, I''m definitely +1.
(hmm. maybe "web.py" fits the spec? but that''s more a library than a frame-
work, of course...)
</F>
Fredrik Lundh wrote:Kay Schluehr wrote:I''d be interested in what people think about bundling one of the
diverse Python webframeworks with the Python distribution which will be
"just there" as like Tcl/Tk+Tkinter for GUI-programming.
if you can find one that''s relatively stable, simple enough to enable beginners to
do simple things with just a little python code, can do simple stuff without needing
a full-blown DB, and can run as an ordinary CGI if necessary, I''m definitely +1.
(hmm. maybe "web.py" fits the spec? but that''s more a library than a frame-
work, of course...)
web.py has the great advantage that (allegedly) you can migrate apps
from CGI to FastCGI, mod_python, WSGI.
It hardly counts as stable of course - having just been released. +1 on
including it though ;-)
To be fair, it would be better to incldue a library rather than a
framework in the standard library.
There are a few fundamental "philosophy differences" in web apps which
makes it a bit of a religious war. This means getting something into
the standard library is likely to be the cause of intractable
discussions. *sigh*
I think Ian Bickings approach (ius this WSGI or paste ??) is to develop
a framework that componentizes the elements of web applications. (I
geuss it''s a protocol as much as a framework). This means that you''re
not locked into design decisions at the start of the game - and
components developed that follow the protocol can be easily re-used in
other projects.
Unfortuantely they (he ?) have made the API a blocking API (WSGI at
least is blocking) - this means it can''t be used without threads. So
there is still a fundamental philosophy question here.
Other frameworks like Django and turbogears can''t (as easily) share
parts of applications designed for the other framework. It would be
very difficult to jsutify including one over the other to include in
the standard library.
All the best,
Fuzzyman
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/index.shtml
</F>
这篇关于不公正的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
