I stumbled upon this question in the reopen queue, and looking at it I could find reasons to leave it closed, so I voted [leave closed].
Then I was curious about what made it gather so many reopen votes, and went to the review history, and from there to the post itself.
It was closed by a trusted user and a moderator. So I read the question again. Then again, and again.. and came to the conclusion that the only solid reason I had to vote to close, was that it was a comparative-review. So I downvoted the post, voted to reopen, and left a comment:
I voted to leave this question closed in the review queue, because it's a comparative review showing 3 distinct approaches to a problem that isn't presented in full context. Then I came here and voted to reopen, because for now, it's community consensus that comparative reviews are on-topic. However I downvoted it, because I don't agree with this, and it remains a borderline question, but in all fairness I have to lean on the "reopen" side of the fence. It would be much better to include one of these snippets as part of actual code that's using it, and then voicing your concerns about it.
I don't know if that question was rightfully reopened. I'm biased against the format being used, but I find "hypothetical code" could be invoked for closing it - but it would be unfair to that user to re-close that question just with a different close reason, and comparative reviews are supposedly on-topic.
I don't like such comparative reviews. I find they make poor questions, more than often include very little context (if any), and in my own humble opinion, even with full context, boil down to a roundabout way of asking "what's the best practice regarding X?", which is explicitly off-topic on this site.
I've seen a number of regulars mention they don't like comparative reviews either.
So I'm probing the community here: is on-topicness of comparative reviews still a consensus? What are the arguments for it, compared to the arguments against it?