How did you handle situations when you disagreed with the reviewer's assessment of your code?

I try to understand the reviewer's logic by asking clarifying questions. If I still disagree, I argue my position based on:

• Technical details and constraints.
• Readability and maintainability of the code.
• Performance.
• Compliance with design patterns and standards adopted in the project.
• Possible side effects of the proposed change.

The goal is not to "win" but to find the optimal solution for the project. Sometimes we reach a compromise or agree to discuss further with the team. The main thing is constructive dialogue and professional attitude.