Refactor mutation events registration by moving reusable code from relevant steps to EventUti

[porunov]

This will allow to reuse callback registration logic for extended classes of mutation steps.

Related discussion where the conclusion was made to relax individual steps based on necessity: https://lists.apache.org/thread/vjbjh29kwjhd5lcmkqqqqrhw7rw2ynh9

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 82.17822% with 18 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 76.81%. Comparing base (9b46b67) to head (a0e6869).
Report is 92 commits behind head on 3.7-dev.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...n/process/traversal/step/util/event/EventUtil.java	85.29%	4 Missing and 6 partials ⚠️
...ess/traversal/step/sideEffect/AddPropertyStep.java	65.21%	7 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##             3.7-dev    #2609      +/-   ##
=============================================
+ Coverage      76.14%   76.81%   +0.67%     
- Complexity     13152    13194      +42     
=============================================
  Files           1084     1087       +3     
  Lines          65160    66303    +1143     
  Branches        7285     7293       +8     
=============================================
+ Hits           49616    50931    +1315     
+ Misses         12839    12652     -187     
- Partials        2705     2720      +15     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[spmallette]

do you think there should be utilities for all of these sorts of things? like this similar sort of code in AddVertexStep.

[porunov]

do you think there should be utilities for all of these sorts of things? like this similar sort of code in AddVertexStep.

I think the more we can make logic reusable the better. So, I think we can make utilities for all the relevant places where such event registration is used.

[xiazcy]

I'm good with the change, but I have similar question as Stephen. Is it worth adding one extra util file just for the removed events registration? I don't quite see these method used elsewhere.

For example, when refactoring for other types of event registration, it might be too much to AddedEventUtil or ChangedEventUtil. Perhaps renaming RemovedEventUtil to something more general, like EventUtil, so we can group refactored methods together for all event types?

[porunov]

I'm good with the change, but I have similar question as Stephen. Is it worth adding one extra util file just for the removed events registration? I don't quite see these method used elsewhere.

For example, when refactoring for other types of event registration, it might be too much to AddedEventUtil or ChangedEventUtil. Perhaps renaming RemovedEventUtil to something more general, like EventUtil, so we can group refactored methods together for all event types?

Definitely makes sense 👍 I will update it tomorrow.

[porunov]

@spmallette @xiazcy Pushed an update to make this PR more general. Refactored all places with events registration logic by moving reusable code to EventUtil.

[spmallette]

thanks - added in a couple follow-on bits for formatting/javadoc: bd5836a