[Dancer-users] Flash Message

Alberto Simoes ambs at perl-hackers.net
Sat Feb 5 23:05:00 CET 2011 

Thank you! 0.310 working like a charm :)

On 05/02/2011 12:18, damien krotkine wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> So I juste released Dancer-Plugin-FlashMessage-0.308
>
> After discussing with sukria, sawyer, franck, I decided to go with the
> minimalistic implementation of the Flash Message Plugin :
>
> Messages are always associated to a name, and stored in a hashref in the session
>
> There is no persistence option, flash messages are deleted either when
> used in the template, or when retrieved using flash($key)
>
> I think this solution makes it very easy to use the plugin. Also, it's
> similar to what exists in other web framework.
>
> And so it leaves the room for a
> Dancer::Plugin::FlashMessage::Advanced, or however you want to call
> it,for anyone (Flavio ?) that needs a more advanced set of features.
>
> I hope that's OK with you guys. Thanks again for the feedback  :)
>
> dams
>
> On 30 January 2011 21:17, Flavio Poletti<polettix at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> https://github.com/polettix/Dancer-Plugin-FlashMessage/commit/b36a20d2b8d355d96a714c408aa2331a9ced7efe
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 8:28 PM, Brian E. Lozier<brian at massassi.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Where on github can I see comments?
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 2:49 AM, damien krotkine<dkrotkine at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi !
>>>>
>>>> I've commented on github. Let's swithc to that for the following
>>>> discussion indeed. Brian, you are more than welcome to participate :)
>>>>
>>>> dams
>>>>
>>>> On 29 January 2011 14:59, Flavio Poletti<polettix at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>      I don't know if this mailing list is actually the right place to
>>>>> continue this discussion about this module implementation, let us know
>>>>> if
>>>>> you're bored!
>>>>> I implemented a generic approach and you can find it
>>>>>
>>>>> here: https://github.com/polettix/Dancer-Plugin-FlashMessage/tree/alternatives
>>>>> It is based on the configurability of three traits:
>>>>> * how messages are registered ("queue" option)
>>>>> * how additional parameters are handled ("arguments" option)
>>>>> * how messages are flushed away ("dequeue" option).
>>>>> There is a lot of new meat so I also added the full documentation with
>>>>> some
>>>>> examples. This implementation is kinda back-compatible, with two
>>>>> outstanding
>>>>> exceptions:
>>>>> * persistence has been dropped, even though its functionality has been
>>>>> absorbed by "dequeue"
>>>>> * the 'flash' method now only *sets* messages, and it never deletes
>>>>> them.
>>>>> IMHO, the case for deletion in the code is quite obscure, so I tried to
>>>>> move
>>>>> this functionality inside the new "flash_flush" registered keyword. It
>>>>> is
>>>>> anyway possible to revert to the old behaviour if it is considered
>>>>> better.
>>>>> For any other aspects, the current default values replicate the
>>>>> previous
>>>>> behaviour.
>>>>> If it makes sense to you we can add a plethora of tests.
>>>>> Thank you all for your patience, we'll probably better continue this
>>>>> discussion on GitHub if you agree.
>>>>>      Flavio.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Flavio Poletti<polettix at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 6:52 PM, damien krotkine<dkrotkine at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28 January 2011 18:40, Flavio Poletti<polettix at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      the implementation is sound, even though I'd prefer to be able
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> set
>>>>>>>> multiple messages per single channel. If I validate a form, for
>>>>>>>> example, I'd
>>>>>>>> like to flash a warning for each field I don't like, not just the
>>>>>>>> last
>>>>>>>> one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hm, my brain being what it is on friday night, could you elaborate a
>>>>>>> bit more ? can you give an example of such channels ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm thinking you could use an array of string as flash.warnings,
>>>>>>> instead of a simple string, but I'm not sure I understand what you're
>>>>>>> saying
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, you got the "channel" idea. I'd like to use flash like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     flash warning =>  'you made error X';
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and then, possibly later, say:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      flash warning =>  'you made error Y';
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the current implementation, only the last gets to the template. I'm
>>>>>> suggesting to always push the incoming $value into an array.
>>>>>> Otherwise, with
>>>>>> the current implementation that lets you delete stuff, I'd be forced
>>>>>> to do
>>>>>> it like this:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     my $array = flash('warning') || [];
>>>>>>     push @$array, 'you made error X';
>>>>>>     flash warning =>  $array;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> which is a bit ugly...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On the other hand, deleting flash messages from the controller does
>>>>>>>> seem to
>>>>>>>> be a corner case, which I'd handle with an ad-hoc function or
>>>>>>>> ignore
>>>>>>>> completely.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'll try to propose something on GitHub that lets the end user
>>>>>>>> decide
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> preferred semantics through a configuration; I would personally
>>>>>>>> like to
>>>>>>>> avoid having leftovers in the flash when my templates are not
>>>>>>>> bug-free
>>>>>>>> and I
>>>>>>>> definitely don't like the idea of remembering to call
>>>>>>>> flash->flush()
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree. After all, maybe it would make sense to have 3 behaviors :
>>>>>>> behaviour 1 : delete all the keys as soon as one is used (to be
>>>>>>> implemented )
>>>>>>> behaviour 2 : delete only the key which is used ( current
>>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>> )
>>>>>>> behaviour 3 : never delete the keys ( currently persistence = 1 )
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And maybe behaviour 1 should be the default, I don't know. As long as
>>>>>>> behaviour 2 is available, I'm happy (and brian too)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> maybe the behaviour could be chosen with the persistence config
>>>>>>> keyword ? It could be renamed to flush_behaviour
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> flush_behaviour = key_level
>>>>>>> flush_behaviour = hash_level
>>>>>>> flush_behaviour = never
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you think ? OK I'm terrible at finding good names, so any
>>>>>>> help
>>>>>>> welcome :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd leave "_behaviour", add an 'always' (your previous implementation)
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> put something like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> flush = 'key'
>>>>>> flush = 'all'
>>>>>> flush = 'always'
>>>>>> flush = 'never'
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, as long as it's documented and it's reasonably connected to
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> behaviour everything is fine :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (even
>>>>>>>> though it sounds so nice!)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> aha, yes, I like flash->flush :) Let's add it for fun, even if it's
>>>>>>> not necessary :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      Flavio.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 6:33 PM, damien krotkine
>>>>>>>> <dkrotkine at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I agree with Brian, for a slightly different reason :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let's imagine this:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> you have a Template1, that does this :<% flash.keys() %>, to be
>>>>>>>>> able
>>>>>>>>> to know that they are errors. If that's the case, it doesn't
>>>>>>>>> display
>>>>>>>>> the errors, but display a link, saying that they are erros. This
>>>>>>>>> link
>>>>>>>>> does a new request against the server, serving Template2
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Template2 does use flash.error, and effectively consumes the
>>>>>>>>> message.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You don't want the flash hash structure to be emptied just after
>>>>>>>>> having displayed Template1, you want the messages to survive until
>>>>>>>>> Template2 (after all, you didn't consume them in Template1)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If I understand correctly, In the original implementation, the
>>>>>>>>> simple
>>>>>>>>> fact of getting the keys of the hash would delete all the
>>>>>>>>> messages, so
>>>>>>>>> the next request, Template2 won't be able to retrieve<%
>>>>>>>>> flash.error
>>>>>>>>> %>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In my new implementation, it would work.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Granted, this is a bit of a corner case, however, I don't see any
>>>>>>>>> drawback.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I could also add a flash->flush() method.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 28 January 2011 18:09, Brian E. Lozier<brian at massassi.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I can't think of any real world use case where you'd only want
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> show
>>>>>>>>>> certain messages.  That said, it still seems better to only
>>>>>>>>>> clear
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> messages you use, not all of them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Flavio Poletti
>>>>>>>>>> <polettix at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>      of course we can try to adapt to it (it seems a bit
>>>>>>>>>>> difficult
>>>>>>>>>>> although
>>>>>>>>>>> probably not impossible), but I fail to see the point.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, if you get the chance to show the messages, you should
>>>>>>>>>>> show
>>>>>>>>>>> them
>>>>>>>>>>> all:
>>>>>>>>>>> showing warnings in one page and errors in the following one
>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>> puzzle
>>>>>>>>>>> the end user, wouldn't it?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Unless there is some use case that point in the opposite
>>>>>>>>>>> direction
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd
>>>>>>>>>>> stick
>>>>>>>>>>> to the "wipe them all when you get the chance to show them"
>>>>>>>>>>> semantics.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>      Flavio.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Brian E. Lozier
>>>>>>>>>>> <brian at massassi.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like a pretty good solution.  The only thing I can
>>>>>>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>>> be that if you are in a template and check for flash.error but
>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>>> flash.warning, it looks like it will clear both flash.error
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>>>>> flash.warning.  It seems like it should only clear the one
>>>>>>>>>>>> you're
>>>>>>>>>>>> checking for.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Flavio Poletti
>>>>>>>>>>>> <polettix at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     I thought a bit about it and I think that the current
>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bit too limited (this seems also what brian thinks in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>> report http://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=65009 -
>>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> least
>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>>> what I understand).
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The problem is that the flash message might have to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> displayed
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> next
>>>>>>>>>>>>> request, which happens when redirections kick in. In this
>>>>>>>>>>>>> case,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> flash
>>>>>>>>>>>>> message should be set, kept in the session and removed only
>>>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> actually displayed; this should happen automatically, i.e.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> without
>>>>>>>>>>>>> playing
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the $persistent variable - which is global - or with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> further
>>>>>>>>>>>>> overhead
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the controller side.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Following brian's feedback, I tried to re-code the plugin
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> following
>>>>>>>>>>>>> criteria:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * the "flash" method only adds messages (and handles many of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> them
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> every
>>>>>>>>>>>>> category - you might have more than one error in a page). I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>>>>> point
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> removing messages while inside the controller;
>>>>>>>>>>>>> * the message removal logic is shifted in the template via
>>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>>> anonymous
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sub.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the sub is called then the flash cache is cleared,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise
>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> remains
>>>>>>>>>>>>> there. This should guarantee that the messages are not
>>>>>>>>>>>>> removed
>>>>>>>>>>>>> until
>>>>>>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>>>>> get the chance to be displayed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is the core of the recoding - not tested but should
>>>>>>>>>>>>> suffice
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> give
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the idea:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> register flash =>  sub {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      my ($key, $value) = @_;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      my $flash = session($session_hash_key);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      if (! $flash) { # initialise the container for flash
>>>>>>>>>>>>> messages
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        $flash = {};
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        session($session_hash_key, $flash);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      push @{$flash->{$key}}, $value;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>      return;
>>>>>>>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>>>>>>> before_template sub {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     my $obj = shift;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     my $flashes;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     $obj->{$token_name} = sub {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        if (! $flashes) { # first call, get messages and clear
>>>>>>>>>>>>>           $flashes = session($session_hash_key) || {};
>>>>>>>>>>>>>           session($session_hash_key, {});
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>        return $flashes;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     };
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     return;
>>>>>>>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO there is no need for an "exists", in the template you
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>>>>>> this:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <% IF flash.errors %>...<% END %>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The important thing to remember is that even checking for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> presence
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> something inside "flash" clears the messages, which is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> consistent
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> semantics that "they get cleared as soon as they have a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> chance
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> displayed". The $flashes variable guarantees that they
>>>>>>>>>>>>> survive
>>>>>>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>>>>>> least
>>>>>>>>>>>>> until the end of the request, i.e. you are able to call
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "flash"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> multiple
>>>>>>>>>>>>> times while handling a request and always get all messages.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you think that this makes sense, I can propose a pull
>>>>>>>>>>>>> request
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> GitHub
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or you can make the changes directly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>     Flavio.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 5:48 PM, damien krotkine
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <dkrotkine at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've re-implemented it to be more Rails-like, as sukria
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> said.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/dams/Dancer-Plugin-FlashMessage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and on CPAN, pending  mirrors refresh.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The funny part of the story ? the effective code is only 30
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lines
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> long. Talking about Perl and Dancer expressiveness...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dams.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11 January 2011 14:40, Alexis Sukrieh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <sukria at sukria.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi list!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 11/01/2011 14:29, damien krotkine a écrit :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following previous thread, I've done a first
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dancer::Plugin::FlashMessage :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/dams/Dancer-Plugin-FlashMessage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Great! Thanks a lot for your time dams, the myth is still
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alived!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Dancer's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community)++
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some parts need to be improved, for instance :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - it supports only one flash message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - the keywords are not short enough.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I think I'll change the implementation so that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> template
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> token
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simply called 'flash', and it'll be a hash, like in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rails.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change the registered method so that it's just flash()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instead
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get_flash()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree. I'd like to behave just like Rails' flash
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> feature.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pretty straight forward:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "flash" is an accessor to a particular session hash table
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> whose
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> values
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only be accessed once. Nothing more complicated than
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So to conclude, IMO, flash should be a wrapper like the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> following:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     sub flash {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         my ($key, $value) = @_;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         my $flash = session('_flash');
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         # write
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         if (@_ == 2) {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>              $flash->{$key} = $value;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>              session('_flash' =>  $flash);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         # read (+ delete)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         else {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>             my $value = $flash->{$key};
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>             delete $flash->{$key} if defined $value;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>             session('_flash' =>  $flash);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>         return $value;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is it, I think. This allows for the following code
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dancer
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> app:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      get '/' =>  sub {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>          flash welcome =>  "This is a welcome message, only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shown
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> once";
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>      }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then, as soon as the key 'welcome' is accesed via
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flash('welcome'),
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> entry will be purged.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This will be very helpful for authentication stuff in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> filters,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> messages, notifications, ....
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kudos to dams!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (BTW I haven't read the code yet)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alexis Sukrieh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dancer-users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dancer-users at perldancer.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.backup-manager.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/dancer-users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dancer-users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dancer-users at perldancer.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.backup-manager.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/dancer-users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dancer-users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dancer-users at perldancer.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.backup-manager.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/dancer-users
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dancer-users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>>> Dancer-users at perldancer.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.backup-manager.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/dancer-users
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Dancer-users mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> Dancer-users at perldancer.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.backup-manager.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/dancer-users
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Dancer-users mailing list
> Dancer-users at perldancer.org
> http://www.backup-manager.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/dancer-users

More information about the Dancer-users mailing list