I love it when the comments are rich as it helps the IDE, I love the great formatting achieved especially considering the column limit and I also love that the variable names are only single letter when they can be (a local context of a very clearly defined function).
I don't love the variable declarations inside loops and hadn't noticed them, but even if I did, I don't have an opinion about them. Maybe they aren't good for performance? If so, well, then you have a point but I can't say. I'm not a Java expert, I'm not even using it very often.
My first point in the comment you replied was "don't dismiss it just because it's a language you don't like, it actually looks beautiful" and you are arguing that (correct me if I'm wrong) it's not beautiful at all. I wouldn't down-vote you, but it's obvious that we differ on taste. Maybe I should have said that "the beauty of the referenced code is very hard to match if you ignore your bias against a language and appreciate the stylistic choices" as you would probably also agree that it is at least very, very coherent.
Beautiful code should be readable and single character variable name salads are not readable.
If I'm a new contributor and just browsing the code I want to be able to stop on a line an understand what it roughly does just by reading that line without having to replay the whole execution stack in my head as required context.
I agree that the other issues are stylistic and are less important.
The algorithm might be beautiful but it's debatable for the implementation.
Depends on the standards. A lot of language standards say to declare vars near where you use them. Does make syntactical analysis easier. See scoping and namespace rules.
I don't love the variable declarations inside loops and hadn't noticed them, but even if I did, I don't have an opinion about them. Maybe they aren't good for performance? If so, well, then you have a point but I can't say. I'm not a Java expert, I'm not even using it very often.
My first point in the comment you replied was "don't dismiss it just because it's a language you don't like, it actually looks beautiful" and you are arguing that (correct me if I'm wrong) it's not beautiful at all. I wouldn't down-vote you, but it's obvious that we differ on taste. Maybe I should have said that "the beauty of the referenced code is very hard to match if you ignore your bias against a language and appreciate the stylistic choices" as you would probably also agree that it is at least very, very coherent.