[devwastaken]

This is one of the core criticisms of Django and python web backends.

WSGI is old tech that in your example requires extra packages and code in project to work. By now Python should stand on its own and handle this independently, being proxied to by better http servers like nginx or caddy.

[oooyay]

Django supports ASGI: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/5.0/howto/deployment/asgi/

[marcosdumay]

You have to install software for software to run on your computer?!?

[wiseowise]

You have to install extra software that should’ve been part of std, big difference.

[marcosdumay]

Are you still talking about Apache here?

[ranger_danger]

> This is one of the core criticisms of Django and python web backends.

No it's not. Please cite reputable sources.

[devwastaken]

One does not need to cite a source of criticism, it is in itself the criticism.

[DEADMINCE]

One needs to cite a source for a claim that a particular criticism is widespread.

[ranger_danger]

The burden of proof is on the person making the empirically unfalsifiable claims.

[devwastaken]

You're playing with words to deflect from the argument. No one has to have proof that they have a criticism. They have to have proof that the criticism is as stated. The evidence is self evident given the OP post.

Many share my opinion, and I don't have to prove that. Nor should I, and neither do you for any position you have. Address the argument.

[ranger_danger]

You have to have proof that a claim is "widespread" if you are asserting it as such without any sources, as you have.

[hakstar]

Not only extra packages. They are currently shoehorning extended multiple interpreter support into CPython, which only Django uses. Similarly, the thread support appears to be mainly for the benefit of that famous photo sharing website that uses Django.

CPython is fully commercialized.

[marky1991]

As someone that doesn't work for the photo-sharing website, I love the new multiple interpreter stuff (it does feel a bit redundant now that the gilemtomy is going forward though, but who knows, maybe more cool uses will become apparent with time (and even so, it is making cpython-the-implementation clean up some of its ugly c-isms that it never bothered fixing, so it's a net win imo even if the feature itself ends up being not-useful)) and the gil-removal. As soon as the gil is gone I'm going to be experimenting with some new optimization projects at work, whole new flows that just weren't viable before under multiprocessing now suddenly are. (whether it all works out for us at that point is anyone's guess, but it's now our problem and not the languages', so yay!)

And I'm certainly not unique amongst other pythonistas, this has been a goal for literal decades.