Development: Replace if-else chains with pattern matching
#9303
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
the
server
SamuelRoettgermann
added
chore
small
performance
code quality
deploy:artemis-test1
and removed
deploy:artemis-test1
labels
|
github-actions
bot
added
the
deployment-error
SamuelRoettgermann
removed
the
deployment-error
|
Nice. Is this the only place where the new style can be used? If not, can you convert other places as well? |
Good idea, I actually didn't check. I'll try to find other suitable places. |
SamuelRoettgermann
dismissed stale reviews from SimonEntholzer and coderabbitai
via
11f9bac
…e.java Good advice to eliminate duplicate code
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Good idea. I'll look into the really convoluted classes tomorrow and see where I can apply this technique, but for today I'm too exhausted. If you see a class that seems too convoluted in your eyes (like |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice addition! code lgtm except for a minor nitpick.
I agree with @Strohgelaender that we should move the case-content to its own method for long cases.
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/ExamService.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…java improved variable naming Co-authored-by: Mohamed Bilel Besrour <[email protected]>
SamuelRoettgermann
dismissed stale reviews from BBesrour and coderabbitai
via
b496140
|
Okay, I will now look at optimizing readability for long cases |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Files selected for processing (1)
- src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/ExamService.java (1 hunks)
Additional context used
Path-based instructions (1)
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/ExamService.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
Additional comments not posted (3)
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/ExamService.java (3)
896-922: Excellent refactoring to improve readability!Replacing the if-else-instanceof chain with a switch expression makes the code more concise and easier to understand, while preserving the original behavior for each exercise type.
The IllegalArgumentException for unsupported exercise types is also handled well in the default case.
904-906: LGTM!The
TextExercisecase correctly uses theTextSubmissiontype and checks if the submitted text is not null and not blank.
918-920: Verify the logic for QuizExercise submissions.Unconditionally returning
trueforQuizExercisesubmissions without checking the actual submission content seems unexpected.The comment mentions this is due to performance concerns and is handled differently. Could you please provide more context on how quiz submissions are validated for non-emptiness elsewhere in the codebase? This would help verify if this logic is indeed correct and appropriate.
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/ExamService.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Files selected for processing (4)
- src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/ExamService.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/StudentExamService.java (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/export/DataExportQuizExerciseCreationService.java (2 hunks)
- src/test/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/exam/StudentExamIntegrationTest.java (4 hunks)
Additional context used
Path-based instructions (4)
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/export/DataExportQuizExerciseCreationService.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/StudentExamService.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/ExamService.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_importssrc/test/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/exam/StudentExamIntegrationTest.java (1)
Pattern
src/test/java/**/*.java: test_naming: descriptive; test_size: small_specific; fixed_data: true; junit5_features: true; assert_use: assertThat; assert_specificity: true; archunit_use: enforce_package_rules; db_query_count_tests: track_performance; util_service_factory_pattern: true; avoid_db_access: true; mock_strategy: static_mocks; context_restart_minimize: true
Additional comments not posted (8)
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/export/DataExportQuizExerciseCreationService.java (2)
103-106: LGTM!The code changes correctly handle the case when a question is not answered and the
submittedAnsweris null by skipping to the next question.
Line range hint
108-124: LGTM!The
switchexpression improves the readability and maintainability of the code. Each case handles a specific type ofsubmittedAnswerappropriately.The error handling for the
DragAndDropSubmittedAnswercase is correct, and the emptydefaultcase is acceptable since there are no other expected types ofsubmittedAnswer.src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/StudentExamService.java (2)
319-344: LGTM!The
saveSubmissionQuizExercisehelper function looks good. It handles the quiz specific logic appropriately, ensuring data consistency and avoiding redundant saves.
296-316: LGTM! Theswitchimproves readability.Replacing the
if-elsechain with aswitchexpression improves the readability of the code. Each case handles the corresponding exercise type appropriately.Using the
saveSubmissionQuizExercisehelper function for theQuizExercisecase keeps theswitchconcise and readable.src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/ExamService.java (1)
896-922: RefactoredhasNonEmptySubmissionusing switch expression. LGTM!The switch expression improves code readability compared to if-else chains. The logic for determining non-empty submissions for each exercise type looks correct.
src/test/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/exam/StudentExamIntegrationTest.java (3)
1375-1428: Refactoring to switch statement improves readability.The refactoring of the if-else chain to a switch statement enhances code readability and maintainability. The cases cover the necessary exercise types (ModelingExercise, TextExercise, QuizExercise) and perform appropriate actions and assertions for each type.
1478-1509: Switch statement improves readability for submission assertions.The switch statement used for handling different exercise types (ModelingExercise, TextExercise, QuizExercise, ProgrammingExercise) and performing assertions on the submissions improves code readability. The cases cover the necessary exercise types and perform appropriate assertions for each type.
1593-1617: Switch statement improves readability for versioned submission assertions.The switch statement used for handling different submission types (TextSubmission, ModelingSubmission, FileUploadSubmission, QuizSubmission) and performing assertions on the versioned submission improves code readability. The assertions for each type are appropriate.
The special handling for QuizSubmission, using a non-strict deep JSON comparison after removing IDs, is a good approach to account for potential discrepancies in the order of submitted answers and the presence of IDs.
|
|
||
| // check that the submission belongs to the already saved participation | ||
| if (!existingParticipationInDatabase.getSubmissions().contains(submissionFromClient)) { | ||
| throw new AccessForbiddenException("User " + currentUser.getLogin() + " cannot submit a different submission " + submissionFromClient + " for participation " | ||
| + existingParticipationInDatabase.getId()); | ||
| } | ||
| // check that no result has been injected | ||
| if (submissionFromClient.getLatestResult() != null) { | ||
| throw new AccessForbiddenException("User " + currentUser.getLogin() + " cannot inject a result " + submissionFromClient.getLatestResult() + " for submission " | ||
| + submissionFromClient + " and participation " + existingParticipationInDatabase.getId()); | ||
| } | ||
| submissionFromClient.setParticipation(studentParticipationFromClient); | ||
| submissionFromClient.submissionDate(ZonedDateTime.now()); | ||
| submissionFromClient.submitted(true); | ||
| if (exercise instanceof QuizExercise) { | ||
| // recreate pointers back to submission in each submitted answer | ||
| for (SubmittedAnswer submittedAnswer : ((QuizSubmission) submissionFromClient).getSubmittedAnswers()) { | ||
| submittedAnswer.setSubmission(((QuizSubmission) submissionFromClient)); | ||
| if (submittedAnswer instanceof DragAndDropSubmittedAnswer) { | ||
| ((DragAndDropSubmittedAnswer) submittedAnswer).getMappings() | ||
| .forEach(dragAndDropMapping -> dragAndDropMapping.setSubmittedAnswer(((DragAndDropSubmittedAnswer) submittedAnswer))); | ||
| } | ||
| else if (submittedAnswer instanceof ShortAnswerSubmittedAnswer) { | ||
| ((ShortAnswerSubmittedAnswer) submittedAnswer).getSubmittedTexts() | ||
| .forEach(submittedText -> submittedText.setSubmittedAnswer(((ShortAnswerSubmittedAnswer) submittedAnswer))); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| // check that exactly one submission exists | ||
| if (studentParticipationFromClient.getSubmissions() == null || studentParticipationFromClient.getSubmissions().size() != 1) { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // load quiz submissions for existing participation to be able to compare them in saveSubmission | ||
| // 5. DB Call: read | ||
| submittedAnswerRepository.loadQuizSubmissionsSubmittedAnswers(List.of(existingParticipationInDatabase)); | ||
| // check that the current user owns the participation | ||
| if (!studentParticipationFromClient.isOwnedBy(currentUser) || !existingParticipationInDatabase.isOwnedBy(currentUser)) { | ||
| throw new AccessForbiddenException("User " + currentUser.getLogin() + " is not allowed to access the participation " + existingParticipationInDatabase.getId()); | ||
| } | ||
| studentParticipationFromClient.setExercise(exercise); | ||
|
|
||
| QuizSubmission existingSubmissionInDatabase = (QuizSubmission) existingParticipationInDatabase.findLatestSubmission().orElse(null); | ||
| QuizSubmission quizSubmissionFromClient = (QuizSubmission) submissionFromClient; | ||
| Submission submissionFromClient = studentParticipationFromClient.getSubmissions().iterator().next(); | ||
|
|
||
| if (!isContentEqualTo(existingSubmissionInDatabase, quizSubmissionFromClient)) { | ||
| quizSubmissionRepository.save(quizSubmissionFromClient); | ||
| saveSubmissionVersion(currentUser, submissionFromClient); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| else if (exercise instanceof TextExercise) { | ||
| TextSubmission existingSubmissionInDatabase = (TextSubmission) existingParticipationInDatabase.findLatestSubmission().orElse(null); | ||
| TextSubmission textSubmissionFromClient = (TextSubmission) submissionFromClient; | ||
| if (!isContentEqualTo(existingSubmissionInDatabase, textSubmissionFromClient)) { | ||
| textSubmissionRepository.save(textSubmissionFromClient); | ||
| saveSubmissionVersion(currentUser, submissionFromClient); | ||
| } | ||
| // check that the submission belongs to the already saved participation | ||
| if (!existingParticipationInDatabase.getSubmissions().contains(submissionFromClient)) { | ||
| throw new AccessForbiddenException("User " + currentUser.getLogin() + " cannot submit a different submission " + submissionFromClient + " for participation " | ||
| + existingParticipationInDatabase.getId()); | ||
| } | ||
| // check that no result has been injected | ||
| if (submissionFromClient.getLatestResult() != null) { | ||
| throw new AccessForbiddenException("User " + currentUser.getLogin() + " cannot inject a result " + submissionFromClient.getLatestResult() + " for submission " | ||
| + submissionFromClient + " and participation " + existingParticipationInDatabase.getId()); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| submissionFromClient.setParticipation(studentParticipationFromClient); | ||
| submissionFromClient.submissionDate(ZonedDateTime.now()); | ||
| submissionFromClient.submitted(true); | ||
| switch (exercise) { | ||
| case QuizExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionQuizExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser); | ||
| case TextExercise ignored -> { | ||
| TextSubmission existingSubmissionInDatabase = (TextSubmission) existingParticipationInDatabase.findLatestSubmission().orElse(null); | ||
| TextSubmission textSubmissionFromClient = (TextSubmission) submissionFromClient; | ||
| if (!isContentEqualTo(existingSubmissionInDatabase, textSubmissionFromClient)) { | ||
| textSubmissionRepository.save(textSubmissionFromClient); | ||
| saveSubmissionVersion(currentUser, submissionFromClient); | ||
| } | ||
| else if (exercise instanceof ModelingExercise) { | ||
| ModelingSubmission existingSubmissionInDatabase = (ModelingSubmission) existingParticipationInDatabase.findLatestSubmission().orElse(null); | ||
| ModelingSubmission modelingSubmissionFromClient = (ModelingSubmission) submissionFromClient; | ||
| if (!isContentEqualTo(existingSubmissionInDatabase, modelingSubmissionFromClient)) { | ||
| modelingSubmissionRepository.save(modelingSubmissionFromClient); | ||
| saveSubmissionVersion(currentUser, submissionFromClient); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| case ModelingExercise ignored -> { | ||
| ModelingSubmission existingSubmissionInDatabase = (ModelingSubmission) existingParticipationInDatabase.findLatestSubmission().orElse(null); | ||
| ModelingSubmission modelingSubmissionFromClient = (ModelingSubmission) submissionFromClient; | ||
| if (!isContentEqualTo(existingSubmissionInDatabase, modelingSubmissionFromClient)) { | ||
| modelingSubmissionRepository.save(modelingSubmissionFromClient); | ||
| saveSubmissionVersion(currentUser, submissionFromClient); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| default -> { | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM! Consider extracting common validations.
The changes to the saveSubmission function look good. It has a clear responsibility and the control flow is easy to follow.
Consider extracting the common validation logic (checking for single participation and submission, verifying user access) into a separate function. This will make the main function more readable by abstracting away the details.
|
What do you think of the bot suggestion? I personally think it's a good idea. |
|
There hasn't been any activity on this pull request recently. Therefore, this pull request has been automatically marked as stale and will be closed if no further activity occurs within seven days. Thank you for your contributions. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 5
Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Files selected for processing (1)
- src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/StudentExamService.java (1 hunks)
Additional context used
Path-based instructions (1)
src/main/java/de/tum/in/www1/artemis/service/exam/StudentExamService.java (1)
Pattern
src/main/java/**/*.java: naming:CamelCase; principles:{single_responsibility,small_methods,no_duplication}; db:{perf_queries,datetime_not_timestamp}; rest:{stateless,singleton,delegate_logic,http_only,minimal_dtos}; dtos:{java_records,no_entities,min_data,single_resp}; di:constructor_injection; kiss:simple_code; file_handling:os_indep_paths; practices:{least_access,avoid_transactions,code_reuse,static_member_ref,prefer_primitives}; sql:{param_annotation,uppercase,avoid_subqueries};java:avoid_star_imports
| // check that exactly one participation exists | ||
| if (exercise.getStudentParticipations() == null || exercise.getStudentParticipations().size() != 1) { | ||
| return; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider adding logging for validation failures
In the validation checks where the method returns early due to the conditions not being met (lines 259-260 and 270-271), consider adding logging statements. This will help in monitoring and debugging by providing insights into why certain submissions or participations were not processed.
Also applies to: 270-272
| private void saveSubmissionQuizExercise(Submission submissionFromClient, StudentParticipation existingParticipationInDatabase, User currentUser) { | ||
| // recreate pointers back to submission in each submitted answer | ||
| for (SubmittedAnswer submittedAnswer : ((QuizSubmission) submissionFromClient).getSubmittedAnswers()) { | ||
| submittedAnswer.setSubmission(((QuizSubmission) submissionFromClient)); | ||
| if (submittedAnswer instanceof DragAndDropSubmittedAnswer dragAndDropSubmittedAnswer) { | ||
| dragAndDropSubmittedAnswer.getMappings().forEach(dragAndDropMapping -> dragAndDropMapping.setSubmittedAnswer(((DragAndDropSubmittedAnswer) submittedAnswer))); | ||
| } | ||
| else if (submittedAnswer instanceof ShortAnswerSubmittedAnswer shortAnswerSubmittedAnswer) { | ||
| shortAnswerSubmittedAnswer.getSubmittedTexts().forEach(submittedText -> submittedText.setSubmittedAnswer(((ShortAnswerSubmittedAnswer) submittedAnswer))); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // load quiz submissions for existing participation to be able to compare them in saveSubmission | ||
| // 5. DB Call: read | ||
| submittedAnswerRepository.loadQuizSubmissionsSubmittedAnswers(List.of(existingParticipationInDatabase)); | ||
|
|
||
| QuizSubmission existingSubmissionInDatabase = (QuizSubmission) existingParticipationInDatabase.findLatestSubmission().orElse(null); | ||
| QuizSubmission quizSubmissionFromClient = (QuizSubmission) submissionFromClient; | ||
|
|
||
| if (!isContentEqualTo(existingSubmissionInDatabase, quizSubmissionFromClient)) { | ||
| quizSubmissionRepository.save(quizSubmissionFromClient); | ||
| saveSubmissionVersion(currentUser, submissionFromClient); | ||
| } | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reduce code duplication in 'saveSubmission' helper methods
The methods saveSubmissionQuizExercise, saveSubmissionTextExercise, and saveSubmissionModelingExercise share similar logic for checking content equality, saving submissions, and saving submission versions. Consider refactoring to abstract the common functionality into a generic method or utilizing polymorphism to reduce code duplication and enhance maintainability.
Also applies to: 336-343, 348-355
| /** | ||
| * Helper function for {@link #saveSubmission(User, List, Exercise)} | ||
| */ | ||
| private void saveSubmissionTestExercise(Submission submissionFromClient, StudentParticipation existingParticipationInDatabase, User currentUser) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Correct method name from 'saveSubmissionTestExercise' to 'saveSubmissionTextExercise'
The method saveSubmissionTestExercise handles submissions for TextExercise. To maintain consistency and avoid confusion, consider renaming the method to saveSubmissionTextExercise. Update the method name and its invocation in the switch statement accordingly.
Apply the following diff to rename the method:
- private void saveSubmissionTestExercise(Submission submissionFromClient, StudentParticipation existingParticipationInDatabase, User currentUser) {
+ private void saveSubmissionTextExercise(Submission submissionFromClient, StudentParticipation existingParticipationInDatabase, User currentUser) {
...
- case TextExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionTestExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser);
+ case TextExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionTextExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser);Also applies to: 298-298
| StudentParticipation existingParticipationInDatabase = existingRelevantParticipations.stream().filter(p -> p.getId().equals(studentParticipationFromClient.getId())) | ||
| .findFirst().orElseThrow(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Provide a specific exception when participation is not found
Using orElseThrow() without specifying an exception results in a NoSuchElementException if the participation is not found. To improve error handling and make debugging easier, consider throwing a custom exception with a detailed message.
Apply the following diff to throw a custom exception:
- .findFirst().orElseThrow();
+ .findFirst().orElseThrow(() -> new EntityNotFoundException("Participation not found for ID: " + studentParticipationFromClient.getId()));Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| StudentParticipation existingParticipationInDatabase = existingRelevantParticipations.stream().filter(p -> p.getId().equals(studentParticipationFromClient.getId())) | |
| .findFirst().orElseThrow(); | |
| StudentParticipation existingParticipationInDatabase = existingRelevantParticipations.stream().filter(p -> p.getId().equals(studentParticipationFromClient.getId())) | |
| .findFirst().orElseThrow(() -> new EntityNotFoundException("Participation not found for ID: " + studentParticipationFromClient.getId())); |
| switch (exercise) { | ||
| case QuizExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionQuizExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser); | ||
| case TextExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionTestExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser); | ||
| case ModelingExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionModelingExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser); | ||
| default -> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Handle unexpected exercise types in the 'default' case
Currently, the default case in the switch statement is empty. To ensure that unhandled exercise types are properly accounted for, consider adding a logging statement or throwing an exception in the default case. This will help identify unexpected exercise types at runtime.
Apply the following diff to handle the default case:
default -> {
+ throw new IllegalArgumentException("Unsupported exercise type: " + exercise.getClass());
}Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| switch (exercise) { | |
| case QuizExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionQuizExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser); | |
| case TextExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionTestExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser); | |
| case ModelingExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionModelingExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser); | |
| default -> { | |
| switch (exercise) { | |
| case QuizExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionQuizExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser); | |
| case TextExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionTestExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser); | |
| case ModelingExercise ignored -> saveSubmissionModelingExercise(submissionFromClient, existingParticipationInDatabase, currentUser); | |
| default -> { | |
| throw new IllegalArgumentException("Unsupported exercise type: " + exercise.getClass()); | |
| } |
Checklist
General
Server
Motivation and Context
If-else chains aren't pleasant to read, nor are they particularly efficient, and since Java 21 we have pattern matching, so let's use that.
Switch-statements may be optimized to run in
O(1), whereas if-else chains will typically lead toO(n)runtime complexity, however this isn't guaranteed as it depends on the respective Java implementation.Either way, the benefit in terms of performance will probably be negligible, however the readability improvement alone justifies this change.
Description
Changed if-else-instanceof-chains to utilize pattern matching (introduced by Java 21) instead. No logic was changed.
Steps for Testing
Since this doesn't affect any logic, there are no observable changes.
Only ways to test are code review and running the server tests, which do all pass for me locally, except for 8 unrelated tests.
Review Progress
Code Review
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Refactor
Tests