Re: Response - Ben Bangert - com.googlegroups.pylons-discuss

14 messages in com.googlegroups.pylons-discussRe: Response

From	Sent On	Attachments
Philip Jenvey	21 Jun 2006 13:21
Jose Galvez	21 Jun 2006 13:24
Jose Galvez	21 Jun 2006 13:28
ToddG	21 Jun 2006 14:31
jose	22 Jun 2006 10:13
Ian Bicking	22 Jun 2006 10:22
Ben Bangert	22 Jun 2006 10:26
Ian Bicking	22 Jun 2006 13:45
Ben Bangert	22 Jun 2006 14:05
Ben Bangert	22 Jun 2006 14:30
Jose Galvez	22 Jun 2006 14:40
Ben Bangert	22 Jun 2006 15:44
ToddG	22 Jun 2006 17:16
ToddG	22 Jun 2006 17:26

Subject:	Re: Response
From:	Ben Bangert (be...@groovie.org)
Date:	06/22/2006 03:44:01 PM
List:	com.googlegroups.pylons-discuss

On Jun 22, 2006, at 2:40 PM, Jose Galvez wrote:

I think text_response would be worse then just going back to Response. Rather then creating a new way to send output the the browser (text_response) why not just creat two alias for WSCGIResponse? Response and response, then either could be used.

I think it's mainly just that having response be lower-case can imply that its an instance just like request. When a response instance is actually the opposite to request, not a Response factory/class. I don't think the issue matters much, this doesn't look that bad:

resp = response() return resp

So despite the mismatch, we'll just stick with response and alias it to WSGIResponse. I should note that using WSGIResponse yourself is not recommended since that means we can't sub-class it in future Pylons should we need to.

Cheers, Ben