On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 01:15:52 GMT, Valerie Peng <valer...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> @martinuy: I agree and also acknowledge that it might be a matter of taste. >> In my view, the object-oriented/polymorphic design looks more idiomatic. >> Even if it spans a couple more classes/methods, each of them is shorter and >> simpler. Overall, it requires less control flow statements and clarifying >> comments. > > Yes, it's a matter of taste. Both work. It took me a while to understand the > various Mergers, their differences and the flow of how it works. Just want to > note that the lack of comments doesn't mean the code is more > self-explanatory, it may just need more comments. Anyway, it's just different > personal preference. > `keyMerger = keyMerger.merge(key);` is carried over from your multi-merger > model. This and other things can be further changed. It's not the keypoint... For the record, I prefer @valeriepeng's proposal as well. However, I believe we have already hinted that it is, perhaps, subjective. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22215#discussion_r1920653858
