Hacker News Reader

Comment by kapilvt | Hacker News Reader

how much of that existing code has any application in a websocket context.. if it uses the orm layer throw it out.. if it uses the template layer.. optionally throw it out for efficiency (jinja and friends).. what are you really left with... routing.. trivial.. a familiar api with the guts out.. overrated and a hobgoblin of consistency.

View on HN

This system doesn't replace Django; it complements it.

You could build 95% of an application with the traditional request-response model and add the 5% of real-time featurs with a system similar to my demo.

(Of course, given your opinions on Django, I don't recommend you build anything with it.)

Well said =) It's incredibly frustrating to so easily build the entire app with a "traditional" django stack and then be faced with solving for a whole new stack just to avoid wasteful XHR-polling for some simple server-side event driven UI updates.

We've implemented some SSE based solutions lately with gevent & nginx in front of django, and it's been great to keep it all in the django family.

Maybe switching to py3k has some value after all... =)

I concur.

In addition to templating, orm and routing there is also highly integrated i18n toolchain/workflow, built-in csrf protection, good session handling, well integrated caching and many more of such 'details'.

All those things by themselves could be considered trivial and could be gotten from many individual libraries - the level of integration and polish you encounter with Django is anything but trivial though and takes real time and effort.

I've recently had to make a choice for a Python based application platform/environment and have chosen Django (again) despite having no use for the ORM and ORM-using contrib modules. Simply because all the other things are there and work together beautifully without me spending any time on code that is not directly related to my goals.

In my opinion there is nothing wrong with doing simple Django ORM calls even with a tornado/gevent websocket. Async purists will cry foul, but if all you want is a realtime feature, you can block for a few milliseconds without getting into trouble.

In the long run they might build tulip-awareness into the ORM.

For that matter I start Tornado servers with management commands just for convenience...

Or you could do this ... https://gist.github.com/anonymous/5190528

This blocks in a separate thread leaving the event loop to handle other tasks.

Trivial or not, working within an existing library provides a level of maintainability you just don't get when you toss in something like Tornado to do the tiny bit of your app that requires a persistent connection and websockets. Even if all I got was django's router and views, it's save me the awful headache of having to graft Tornado and Django together, coding under two entirely different library sets.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com