Code Review 英语高频表达（礼貌地评审与反馈）

This is a really clean solution — the early return makes it much easier to follow.

这个实现很干净——提前返回让逻辑读起来清楚多了。

Nit: could we rename `data` to something more descriptive like `userRecords`?

小问题：能把 `data` 改成更有描述性的名字吗，比如 `userRecords`？

Small thing — this could be a const since it's never reassigned.

小细节——这个变量没被重新赋值，可以用 const。

I think this will throw if `items` is empty — should we guard against that?

我觉得如果 `items` 为空这里会报错——要不要加个判断？

Doesn't this introduce an off-by-one error? The loop seems to skip the last element.

这里是不是有个差一错误？循环好像漏掉了最后一个元素。

Can you help me understand why we need the extra copy here?

能帮我理解一下这里为什么需要额外复制一份吗？

What's the expected behavior when the request times out?

请求超时时预期的行为是什么？

Have we considered extracting this into a separate service? It's doing a lot.

我们有没有考虑过把这块抽成单独的服务？它承担的职责有点多。

I'd lean toward composition over inheritance here, but I'm open to your reasoning.

这里我更倾向于用组合而不是继承，不过我也想听听你的考虑。

Could we add a test that covers the null case before merging?

合并之前能补一个覆盖 null 情况的测试吗？

Would you mind splitting this into two PRs? The refactor and the feature are hard to review together.

能麻烦你把它拆成两个 PR 吗？重构和新功能混在一起不太好审。

LGTM — nice work. Feel free to merge once CI is green.

LGTM——做得不错。CI 通过后你就可以合并了。