On Wed, 19 Nov 2025 00:30:53 GMT, Nir Lisker <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I second John's suggestion with `this.`. It matters when refactoring, even >> with an IDE. > >> I second John's suggestion with `this.`. It matters when refactoring, even >> with an IDE. > > I'm not sure what you want me to change here exactly. Is it about renaming > parameters (see [this > discussion](https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/1880#discussion_r2297668458)), > or not using `this`, which you didn't seem to mind > [here](https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/1880#discussion_r2297721228)? I meant to suggest using `this` when parameter name is the same as the field name. Even though the compiler and IDE know which is which, the IDE might stumble during refactoring. L50 chrono = Objects.requireNonNullElse(chrono, DEFAULT_CHRONO); ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1880#discussion_r2542576776
