<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
<br><div><div>On 9 Jun 2009, at 21:29, J. Shirley wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 1:15 PM, Tomas Doran <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:bobtfish@bobtfish.net">bobtfish@bobtfish.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div class="im"><br></div> How would something like a 'cookie_name_stash_key' configuration parameter sit with you?<br> <br> If not provided, we do what we do now, if provided then that stash key will be used if present and defined, otherwise the default handling will be used.</blockquote><div><br>If it can understand nested keys in the stash, I'm all in favor of it.<br><br>Something like $c->stash->{page}->{cookie_domain} would fit inline with what I currently do for similar things.<br></div></div></blockquote></div><br><div>I guess if cookie_name_stash_key is a non ref scalar, then it's treated as a sting ($c->stash->{$cookie_name_stash_key}), otherwise it's treated as a set of keys (e.g. cookie_name_stash_key => [qw/page cookie_domain/] does your example above.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div>t0m</div><div><br></div></body></html>