Improve the logic of registerBeanPostProcessors() in PostProcessorRegistrationDelegate

[Jirath-Liu]

#26398
merge the three filtering step to one for statement
the main code is below

                // Separate between BeanPostProcessors that implement PriorityOrdered,
		// Ordered, and the rest.
		List<BeanPostProcessor> priorityOrderedPostProcessors = new ArrayList<>();
		List<BeanPostProcessor> internalPostProcessors = new ArrayList<>();
		List<BeanPostProcessor> orderedPostProcessors = new ArrayList<>();
		List<BeanPostProcessor> nonOrderedPostProcessors = new ArrayList<>();
		for (String ppName : postProcessorNames) {
			BeanPostProcessor pp = beanFactory.getBean(ppName, BeanPostProcessor.class);
			if (pp instanceof MergedBeanDefinitionPostProcessor) {
				internalPostProcessors.add(pp);
			}
			else if (beanFactory.isTypeMatch(ppName, PriorityOrdered.class)) {
				priorityOrderedPostProcessors.add(pp);
			}
			else if (beanFactory.isTypeMatch(ppName, Ordered.class)) {
				orderedPostProcessors.add(pp);
			}
			else {
				nonOrderedPostProcessors.add(pp);
			}
		}

with merging the filtering,

• the goal of this function is more distinct
• can save unnecessary code
• save more space as no need to use List<String> orderedPostProcessorNames
• achieve the goal with only one for statement

[pivotal-issuemaster]

@Jirath-Liu Please sign the Contributor License Agreement!

Click here to manually synchronize the status of this Pull Request.

See the FAQ for frequently asked questions.

[pivotal-issuemaster]

@Jirath-Liu Thank you for signing the Contributor License Agreement!

[sbrannen]

Thanks for PR.

Unfortunately, the proposal changes the order in which PriorityOrdered, Ordered, and non-ordered BeanPostProcessors are instantiated which constitutes a breaking change.

In light of that, I am closing this PR.

For additional information, please see all declined PRs involving proposed changes to PostProcessorRegistrationDelegate.