[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-781?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13668659#comment-13668659
 ] 

Michael Dürig commented on OAK-781:
-----------------------------------

bq. We could avoid the instanceof check by...

This presumes that an unconnected {{Head}} never has a {{MutableNodeState}}, 
which is not true. Obtaining a {{MemoryNodeBuilder}} from a 
{{ModifiedNodeState}} results in such a situation by virtue of the unwrapping 
of the {{ModifiedNodeState}} happening in the constructor of 
{{MutableNodeState}}.
                
> 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, 
> memorynodebuilder-1.png, memorynodebuilder-2.png, OAK-781-2.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

Reply via email to