change check order for xautoclaim

[charsyam]

change check order for xautocommit parameters

I think it is more readable and eailer.

because we already checked object is existed by lookupKeyRead at the beginning of code.

and it is a little bit faster when key is not exist.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 71.42857% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 71.43%. Comparing base (cb10d9d) to head (2a82deb).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/t_stream.c	71.42%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##           unstable    #2318      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     71.44%   71.43%   -0.02%     
============================================
  Files           123      123              
  Lines         67086    67086              
============================================
- Hits          47931    47922       -9     
- Misses        19155    19164       +9     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/t_stream.c	92.72% <71.42%> (-0.61%)	⬇️

... and 12 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[sungming2]

I'm not sure this is the correct error message. If I understand correctly, -NOGROUP typically means the consumer group doesn't exist for the key, not that the key itself is missing. In this case, the error seems more related to the key not existing at all, so maybe a different error message would be more appropriate.

[sungming2]

We can change comment if it is necessary

[sungming2]

Can I know why the group null check is still needed here, now that the key existence check has been moved earlier? I'm also wondering if there is a specific reason to keep the group check separate.