On Mon, 7 Oct 2024 07:39:16 GMT, Alan Bateman <al...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I do not see what is "confusing" in that case, as the caller still gets what >> he intends: a reader for the passed source. I also wonder how likely that >> case actually is. Anyways, I may be biased as I proposed `of`. >> >> @AlanBateman WDYT? > > You'll get different opinions on naming, personally I think Reader.of(cs) is > very readable at use-sites. There are several other static methods named "of" > added in other areas in recent years. So let's go with `Reader.of()` unless nobody has stronger feelings against it. 😃 ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21371#discussion_r1791696472
