If the following code would have been included in the question:
Vector<string> tableType1List
I would first of all have said that Vector is deprecated in favor of ArrayList.
Secondly, that wouldn't have compiled as it's supposed to be Vector<String> (I understand, just an example here on meta, but if it would have been an actual code in the question it would have been very important! Not copying the exact code causes confusion).
And now, the most important things:
Whenever changes has to be made to variable names and stuff because it is company code, that should be mentioned. Mentioning that it is company code and the exact code and context cannot be revealed makes us a bit more understanding. However, this alone might not have changed things in this case.
Additionally, try to come up with an alternative context that makes sense.
The linked question additionally suffers from another problem:
I have the code from a method using Java 6, and the checkstyle complains about the Cyclomatic Complexity being too high (13 instead of the max 10), how can i reduce this?
There is absolutely no description about what your code does or what the purpose of doing that is. I often write the following comment for those cases:
To make life easier for reviewers, please add sufficient context to your question. The more you tell us about what your code does and what the purpose of doing that is, the easier it will be for reviewers to help you. See also this meta question
