[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-781?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13636519#comment-13636519
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-781:
-----------------------------------
Stepping a bit back, I'm not convinced whether the patch takes the correct
implementation approach. {{MemoryNodeBuilder}} is a complex beast with a lot of
dark secrets. Looping non existent nodes through it increases complexity even
further. While my patch passes all tests, I can't confidently say that it is
correct. Neither am I confident that we can maintain and extend this further
down the line. Maybe we should take a more rigorous approach here and
reimplement or refactor {{MemoryNodeBuilder}} from the ground up?
> Clarify / fix effects of MISSING_NODE as base state of NodeBuilder
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-781
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-781
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
> Reporter: Michael Dürig
> Attachments:
> 0001-OAK-781-Clarify-fix-effects-of-MISSING_NODE-as-base-.patch, OAK-781.patch
>
>
> Having a {{MISSING_NODE}} respectively a node state that returns false for
> its {{exists}} method as a base state of a node builder results in undefined
> behaviour. We need to clarify how to handle such cases for resolving OAK-766.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
