[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-1114?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13826378#comment-13826378
]
Michael Dürig commented on OAK-1114:
------------------------------------
The remaining issue is really an edge case. It is about how {{NodeBuilder}}
instances should handle the case where a node is moved to a descendant of it
self. The current contract of the {{moveTo}} method forbids this and mandates
the method to return {{false}}. However for the {{MemoryNodeBuilder}} we can't
detect this.
What do people think about adapting the contract of {{NodeBuilder.moveTo}} and
leave the exact behaviour for such edge cases to the implementation? Oak does
check for these in higher levels already anyway.
{code}
/**
* Move this child to a new parent with a new name. When the move succeeded
this
* builder has been moved to {@code newParent} as child {@code newName}.
Otherwise neither
* this builder nor {@code newParent} are modified.
* <p>
* The move succeeds if both, this builder and {@code newParent} exist,
there is no child with
* {@code newName} at {@code newParent} and {@code newParent} is not in the
subtree of this
* builder.
* <p>
* The move fails if the this builder or {@code newParent} does not exist
or if there is
* already a child {@code newName} at {@code newParent}.
* In all remaining cases (e.g. moving a builder into its own subtree) the
behaviour depends
* on the implementation.
*
* @param newParent builder for the new parent.
* @param newName name of this child at the new parent
* @return {@code true} on success, {@code false} otherwise
*/
{code}
> Clarify NodeBuilder.moveTo() contract
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-1114
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-1114
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Reporter: Michael Dürig
> Assignee: Michael Dürig
> Fix For: 0.12
>
>
> {{NodeBuilder.moveTo()}} currently behaves differently depending on the
> implementation. We should rectify that, clarify the contract and add
> respective unit tests.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)
