Re: [jira] Commented: (JCR-1405) SPI: Introduce NodeInfo.getChildInfos()

[David Rauschenbach <da...@synchronica.com>]

One of the reasons I really don't like Iterators in SPI is because they
make it hard to perform logging. I have a dynamic proxy that performs
trace logging for SPI calls. So in my SPI's I use Apache
ResettableIterator's wherever I can, which my trace logger knows about.
For any other Iterator though, I can't log what's going on, without
being sure I'm not impacting behavior.

David



On Fri, 2008-02-22 at 11:25 -0800, Marcel Reutegger (JIRA) wrote:
> [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1405?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12571544#action_12571544 ] 
> 
> Marcel Reutegger commented on JCR-1405:
> ---------------------------------------
> 
> Julian wrote:
> > So what am I supposed to do when internally an error occurs? 
> 
> I think you should not even create a NodeInfo in that case. IMO a NodeInfo should be self contained and shouldn't hold resources tied to the underlying repository. 
> 
> That's actually also a reason why I don't like changing the return values to an Iterator ;)
> Whenever Iterators are returned it implies that an implementation is allowed (or even encouraged) to lazily retrieve the items. This lazy approach however has some issues. See also JSR 283 mailing list thread 'I whish there was ....'.
> 
> This new method is not intended to return large amounts of ChildInfos that are lazily instanciated and should therefore use an array.
> 
> > SPI: Introduce NodeInfo.getChildInfos()
> > ---------------------------------------
> >
> >                 Key: JCR-1405
> >                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-1405
> >             Project: Jackrabbit
> >          Issue Type: New Feature
> >          Components: jackrabbit-spi
> >            Reporter: angela
> >         Attachments: JCR-1405.patch
> >
> >
> > Improvement suggested by Marcel:
> > ChildInfo is basically a stripped down NodeInfo. With little effort it would even be possible to have NodeInfo extends ChildInfo. Not sure how useful that is, but since we don't have that inheritance in code and at the same time nearly a 100% overlap it makes me suspicious.
> > Here's another idea:
> > introduce a method ChildInfo[] NodeInfo.getChildInfos(). The method either returns:
> > - all child infos, which also gives the correct number of child nodes. this may also mean that an empty array is returned to indicate there are no child nodes.
> > - null, to indicate that there are *lots* of child nodes and the method RepositoryService.getChildInfos() with the iterator should be used. 
>