jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Dürig <mdue...@apache.org>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1304397 - in /jackrabbit/oak/trunk: oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/ oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/api/ oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/kernel/ oak-jcr/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrab
Date Fri, 23 Mar 2012 17:20:13 GMT


On 23.3.12 17:05, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Michael Dürig<mduerig@apache.org>  wrote:
>> On 23.3.12 15:06, Jukka Zitting wrote:
>>> Do we need a null value? As discussed in the MK value type thread, I'd
>>> just treat those cases as errors and throw something like an
>>> IllegalStateException when encountering a null value in a
>>> MK.getNodes() response.
>>
>> I agree for this case. However null values come in handy for tracking
>> transiently removed property states.
>
> OK, I see where you're going.
>
> I'm not sure why we'd need to explicitly track a removed property with
> a sentinel null value instead of just getting rid of the property
> entirely. But I haven't looked closer at the relevant code, so I'm
> probably missing something.

Yes we might not need it later on. However it is useful ATM as I'm 
refactoring my code step by step. We can probably remove it again later.

Michael

>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting

Mime
View raw message