[dancer-users] Handling cookies on D2

[Punter]

My inspiration for this pull request was this supposed documentation 
that describes how the "cookie" keyword works: 
https://github.com/PerlDancer/Dancer2/blob/ea7bc77993277f34fcd27f3eb7b01366877a7d23/lib/Dancer2/Manual/Keywords.pod


On 04/19/2013 07:36 PM, Punter wrote:
> I believe the D2 maintainers should come clean and tell us whether in 
> the future cookies will be handled like this:
>
> my  %stuff  =  cookie  "stuff"
>
> ...or like they are now, which is (if I recall correctly) similar to 
> this:
>
> my  $cookie  =  cookie  "stuff";
> my  %stuff  =  $cookie  ?  $cookie->value  :  ();
>
> Because if I'm making a website that has to work on D2 now, and I want 
> it to keep on working in the future, I have to keep in the back of my 
> mind that one day I will have to change my cookie-related code to keep 
> it compatible with D2. The maintainers shouldn't be letting us in the 
> dark.
>
> Below is the link to a pull request that changes (modernizes, is my 
> opinion) the way cookies are handled. Does this pull request interest 
> you enough so that I write some tests for it?
>
> https://github.com/PerlDancer/Dancer2/pull/200
>
>
>
> On 04/12/2013 12:05 PM, Punter wrote:
>> Just a reminder, that I have two pull requests sitting:
>>
>> #200 changes the way cookies are handled by the developer, according 
>> to the wishes of dagolden in one of his documents. It looks pretty 
>> important to me to deal with as soon as possible, since it will break 
>> backwards compatibility and so it's best to affect as few people as 
>> possible.
>>
>> #211 allows you to set the "views" directory somewhere else, in 
>> accordance with D2 documentation. This is also important, as it will 
>> let the front-end developer upload his stuff without affecting your 
>> (the back-end developer's) stuff. I guess there could be other ways 
>> to achieve this same benefit, but this looks like the most 
>> straightforward and easy-to-figure one. In the last of bigpresh's 
>> session of looking-at-pull-requests two weeks ago, this pull request 
>> was accidentally overlooked.
>