[jira] [Commented] (OAK-2413) Clarify Editor.childNodeChanged()

["Michael Dürig (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2413?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14282376#comment-14282376 ] 

Michael Dürig commented on OAK-2413:
------------------------------------

I think the intended contract is the same as for {{NodeStateDiff}}: "Called for all child nodes that *may* contain changes" (my emphasis). We should make this explicit in the Javadoc and fix the affected implementations. Otherwise those similar APIs would be slightly off in a strange way. More importantly only calling {{childNodeChange()}} when there are actual changes means the implementation would need to eagerly check for those potentially duplicating work the consumer of the callback would need to do anyway. 

> Clarify Editor.childNodeChanged()
> ---------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-2413
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2413
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: core
>            Reporter: Marcel Reutegger
>            Priority: Minor
>
> The current contract for {{Editor.childNodeChanged()}} does not specify if this method may also be called when the child node did not actually change. The method {{NodeStateDiff.childNodeChanged()}} explicitly states that there may be such calls. Looking at the implementation connecting the two classes, {{EditorDiff.childNodeChange()}} simply calls the editor without checking whether the child node did in fact change.
> I think we either have to change the {{EditorDiff}} or update the contract for the Editor and adjust implementations. E.g. right now, PrivilegeValidator (implements Editor), assumes a call to {{childNodeChange()}} indeed means the child node changed.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)