You're right. I removed the stringification when redoing the API. I didn't return it and the docs still retain that message.
I'm still not sure whether it should stringify. That's always a source of trouble. We could stringify with a deprecation or just keep it. What is your opinion? (other than that the docs should be up-to-date :) On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Gabor Szabo <[email protected]> wrote: > > Actually, I just noticed the documentation of both modules (Dancer:: and > Dancer2::) have this in their pod: > > "For convenience the object will automagically return the RFC 2307 > representation when no method is called on it." > > Which means it should still stringify to the rfc2307 value. > > Gabor > > > On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Gabor Szabo <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Finally I got to the point where I was actually testing the part where >> Dancer2::Plugin::Passphrase is used and I think >> I there is a change from the API of Dancer::Plugin::Passphrase >> >> It seems that the 'generate' method of the new module return a >> Dancer2::Plugin::Passphrase::Hashed object >> and does not stringify to the rfc2307 value as happened in the case of >> the Dancer1 version. >> >> Looking at the documentation I see both say that I should store the >> ->rfc2307 value, but because of the stringification I have missed >> that earlier. >> >> If you decided to not include the stringification, then maybe this should >> be emphasized in the docs as well. >> >> Gabor >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > dancer-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.preshweb.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dancer-users > >
_______________________________________________ dancer-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.preshweb.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dancer-users
