Isn't that what bit 3 in the general purpose bit flags if for? When that's set, the CRC and compressed/uncompressed file lengths are written in a Data Descriptor block after the member file data.
Streaming zip creation is well supported by the format though.
I covered that in the sentence that described these as things you could fill with a placeholder and seek() back to later.
Streaming and seeking are antithetical, an implementation gets to pick one, and I imagine for most users streaming would be the edge case. It's debatable whether a library that ensures a fully spec-conforming output is generated at the expense of memory or IO is better or worse.
(FWIW this is written from the perspective of someone who for perverse reasons once wrote a streaming ZIP reader. In order to build such a thing, the ZIP writer had to be buffering/seeking. You can't have both without giving up ability to store uncompressed assets without needless overhead (e.g. JPEG-in-deflate))
I disagree, for a library creating zip files. It's the logical way to do it. Otherwise, you're slurping potentially big files into memory, or making un-needed copies. I've also written zip library code.
The CRC field of the local file header is similar, but its optionality is less painful than the length field
In other words, there isn't a single 'good' ZIP implementation, it all depends on what you're aiming for. AFAIK the built-in Python zipfile module always fully populates the local file header.