(Originally reported over xJon/Tekkit-2#225)
Log: https://mclo.gs/8kozRXE#L4880
Is this something that can be prevented from LogisticsPipes' end?

So the main gist of the bug is: the QuickSort module is clearing the inventory of the Reactor which it should not do.

@Speiger Do you have an idea of what's happening?

@xJon somehow the reactor think it is has 12 chambers attached to it....
that is the crash...

Note that the reactor itself has a logic that at most can have 6 chambers attached.
What you report is "impossible" within IC2C unless something else messes with it.
Like the variable that is caching the result isn't modified outside of the internal "updateSize logic" and that ALWAYS resets it to the base value, and the iterator itself is only 6 elements... so how it can get to 12 elements when it is a 6 element iterator is like:
WHAT THE FUCK...

@Speiger Does reading/seeing about the setup over xJon/Tekkit-2#225 (comment) help to make sense of it?

No nothing in there makes sense to me.
There is not even a indicator for me of "why" this is an issue...
Sorry :/

@xJon somehow the reactor think it is has 12 chambers attached to it.... that is the crash...

Note that the reactor itself has a logic that at most can have 6 chambers attached. What you report is "impossible" within IC2C unless something else messes with it. Like the variable that is caching the result isn't modified outside of the internal "updateSize logic" and that ALWAYS resets it to the base value, and the iterator itself is only 6 elements... so how it can get to 12 elements when it is a 6 element iterator is like: WHAT THE FUCK...

@Speiger I was the one who set up the reactors in the screenshot provided over at the Tekkit 2 Issue tracker.
For confirmation, all of the reactors only have 6 chambers attached to them.

@Dylankjy the problem is not that you placed down more then 6 reactor chambers.
The problem is that the logic is not CAPABLE to DETECT more then 6 chambers.
So that this happens is like as if you had been hit by an cosmic ray...

It would be great if someone could test this issue with build 0.10.4.47.

@Dylankjy @xiaoxinny Any chance you can help test it out?

Apologies, I have already tested this out. It appears to work perfectly fine now, thank you!

@xiaoxinny awesome, thanks :)