Sample

int-ff2ffea39427-I05

Rewrite eligible decimal integer literals in hexadecimal notation

Matched original source

Lines22

Scores

MethodScoreScale
Posnett0.9990–1; higher is more readable
Scalabrino0.6020–1; higher is more readable
Dorn0.2340–1; higher is more readable
Mi0.0120–1; higher is more readable
LLOC1Logical lines; fewer is more readable
DeepSeek V4 Pro18.330–20; mean of three runs
GPT-6.1 Sol190–20; mean of three runs
BTTF0.6370–1; higher is more readable

Views

Source code

package org.springframework.web.socket.sockjs.frame; /** * Applies a transport-specific format to the content of a SockJS frame resulting * in a content that can be written out. Primarily for use in HTTP server-side * transports that push data. * * <p>Formatting may vary from simply appending a new line character for XHR * polling and streaming transports, to a jsonp-style callback function, * surrounding script tags, and more. * * <p>For the various SockJS frame formats in use, see implementations of * {@link org.springframework.web.socket.sockjs.transport.handler.AbstractHttpSendingTransportHandler#getFrameFormat(org.springframework.http.server.ServerHttpRequest) AbstractHttpSendingTransportHandler.getFrameFormat} * * @author Rossen Stoyanchev * @since 4.0 */ public interface SockJsFrameFormat { String format(SockJsFrame frame); }

Loading feature diagnosis…

Source regions

Feature contributions

Feature contributions

FeatureValueContribution
(log-odds)
Source linesThe number of non-empty source lines.22+8.8
Byte entropyHow varied the bytes in the source text are. Repeated bytes give a lower value; a more even mixture gives a higher value.4.749−7.124
Halstead volumeHow much symbolic information the code contains. It combines the total number of operators and values with the number of distinct ones.106.198−3.505

Intercept 8.87 + feature contributions = 7.042 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(7.042) = 0.999.

Score0.602

Feature contributions

FeatureValueContribution
(log-odds)
Identifier layout (horizontal)How rapidly the visual pattern of identifier characters changes from left to right. It measures spatial frequency, not the meaning of the names.220−5.653
Comment layout (horizontal)How rapidly the visual pattern of comment characters changes from left to right.220+2.745
Comment layout frequencyHow frequently the layout switches between lines containing only comments or whitespace and lines containing code.1+1.001
Operator visual areaThe share of the code’s visual area occupied by operators such as +, =, and *.0.013+0.817
Indentation frequencyHow rapidly indentation changes from line to line.8−0.46
Number layout frequencyHow rapidly the number of numeric values per line changes through the code.1+0.398
Identifier layout (vertical)How rapidly the visual pattern of identifier characters changes from top to bottom.21.905−0.104

Intercept 0.07 + feature contributions = -1.186 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(-1.186) = 0.234.

Score0.012
Score1
Run 1

The code is a well-documented, single-purpose interface. It has a clear logical structure, with a concise Javadoc explaining intent, context, and usage. There is no nesting, and the single method declaration makes the action granularity and reading flow straightforward. The code length is minimal and appropriate for an interface definition. The only minor deduction is that the Javadoc could be slightly shorter, but it remains highly readable overall.

Run 2

The code is highly readable. It defines a single-purpose interface with a clear Javadoc explaining its role in SockJS frame formatting. The structure is logical: a package declaration, a well-written documentation block, and one method. Nesting is non-existent. The intent is explicit, the code is concise without unnecessary length, and the single method declaration keeps action granularity clean. The reading flow is natural and professional.

Run 3

The code is highly readable. It is a single, focused interface with one method, making its intent immediately clear. The Javadoc provides excellent context: it explains the purpose, where it’s used, and points to implementations for further understanding. The structure is flat, with no nesting or multiple actions per line. The length is concise, containing only necessary documentation and code. The reading flow is natural, starting with a clear description and ending with the simple method signature.

Run 1

Code Structure: A minimal, logically organized interface with one method. Nesting: No nested control flow or unnecessary structural complexity. Clarity of intent: The interface name, method signature, and Javadoc clearly explain transport-specific SockJS frame formatting, though the method lacks documentation of its return value. Code length: Concise implementation; the documentation is useful, but its long cross-reference slightly reduces readability. Action granularity: The single method declaration occupies its own line, with no combined actions. Reading flow: Natural progression from package declaration to explanatory documentation and interface definition.

Run 2

Code Structure: A logically organized interface with a single, focused method. Nesting: No nested control flow or unnecessary structural complexity. Clarity of intent: Descriptive interface and method names, typed input, and detailed Javadoc clearly establish the transport-specific formatting purpose; method-level documentation could clarify the returned value. Code length: The implementation is minimal, with mostly useful documentation, although the long Javadoc link slightly reduces readability. Action granularity: The sole method declaration occupies its own line and expresses one responsibility. Reading flow: The conventional package, documentation, interface, and method ordering makes the code easy to follow.

Run 3

Code Structure: A clean, logically organized interface with a single responsibility. Nesting: No nested control flow or unnecessary structural depth. Clarity of intent: The interface name, method signature, and Javadoc clearly explain transport-specific SockJS frame formatting, though the method lacks explicit parameter and return documentation. Code length: The implementation is minimal; the explanatory documentation is useful, but the long fully qualified Javadoc link adds visual clutter. Action granularity: The sole method declaration occupies its own line, with no combined actions. Reading flow: Package declaration, documentation, interface, and method follow a natural Java layout.