[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Python-Dev] Is it useful to update cgitb module?

Are there people still actively developing new cgi scripts in python?  I know some modern HTTPDs don?t even support classic cgi without some kind of fastcgi daemon in between.  I am aware that some parts of various wsgi tools use the cgi module, but is the cgitb module useful for them?

Your suggestions might be good ideas, but I don?t know if they would be used.  I feel like its kind of like updating the macpath module - sure you can make code improvements to it if you want, but its for a workflow that is very rarely used.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Python-Dev <python-dev-bounces+tritium-
> list=sdamon.com at python.org> On Behalf Of St?phane Blondon
> Sent: Saturday, April 7, 2018 4:21 PM
> To: python-dev at python.org
> Subject: [Python-Dev] Is it useful to update cgitb module?
> Hello,
> I wonder if it's useful to update the cgitb module, in particular the
> html output.
> I see some possible improvements:
> 1. In both text and html versions:
> When a module is called, there are no parameters (displayed as '()'). I
> think they are unnecessary. Perhaps the parentheses should be removed?
> Perhaps it's better to keep them for backward compatibility?
> ### example for the text version ###
> $ python3 demo.py
> [...]
>  /home/stephane/src/cgitest/demo.py in <module>()
>     7 def func1(a, b):
> [...]
> ### end of example ###
> 2. In html version only:
>  a. If the executed code is in <module>: in this case, it is not shown
> in the html version because the square brackets are interpreted as a
> html tag (see the picture in attachement).
>  b. Update the style of the html or/and using html5. It would be
> prettier but it will be a big change for probably too few benefits.
> What do you think about them? I can report bugs and send pull-requests
> for them but I would prefer to get feedbacks before.
> Regards,
> St?phane