Sample
int-56e4df92c34f-I12
Inline all eligible single-use intermediate local variables
Scores
| Method | Score | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| Posnett | 0.999 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Scalabrino | 0.602 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Dorn | 0.234 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Mi | 0.012 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| LLOC | 1 | Logical lines; fewer is more readable |
| DeepSeek V4 Pro | 18.33 | 0–20; mean of three runs |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | 19 | 0–20; mean of three runs |
| BTTF | 0.637 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
Views
Loading feature diagnosis…
Source regions
Feature contributions
Feature contributions
| Feature | Value | Contribution (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.
| Score | 0.602 |
|---|
Feature contributions
| Feature | Value | Contribution (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.
| Score | 0.012 |
|---|
| Score | 1 |
|---|
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 consists of a single, well-documented interface with one method, making the structure clear and logical. There is no nesting, and the intent is explicitly stated in the Javadoc, which explains the purpose and context of the interface. The code is concise, with no unnecessary length. Action granularity is appropriate—one method declaration with clear parameters and return type. Reading flow is natural, starting from package and imports, followed by a detailed Javadoc, then the interface and method. The only minor drawback is that the Javadoc link is somewhat long, slightly interrupting flow, but it does not significantly affect readability.
Run 3
The code is highly readable. It is a short, well-structured interface with a single clear responsibility. The Javadoc provides useful context about the purpose, usage, and examples of implementations. Naming is descriptive and consistent with Spring conventions. The method signature is concise and unambiguous. There is no unnecessary nesting or length. The reading flow is natural: package, imports (none needed), documentation, interface declaration, then the single abstract method. It could arguably be a functional interface annotation for clarity, but overall it scores very high for readability.
Run 1
Code Structure: A logically organized interface with a single, focused method. Nesting: No nested control flow or unnecessary structural depth. Clarity of intent: The interface name, method signature, and descriptive Javadoc clearly explain transport-specific SockJS frame formatting, though method-level documentation could clarify the return value. Code length: The implementation is minimal; the documentation is useful but includes a lengthy fully qualified link. Action granularity: The sole method declaration occupies its own line. Reading flow: Conventional package, documentation, interface, and method ordering makes the code easy to scan.
Run 2
Code Structure: A logically organized interface with a single, focused responsibility. Nesting: No nested control flow or unnecessary structural complexity. Clarity of intent: The interface name, format method, typed parameter, and Javadoc clearly communicate transport-specific frame formatting, though the method lacks explicit return-value documentation. Code length: The implementation is minimal; the documentation is useful but includes a lengthy cross-reference. Action granularity: The sole method declaration occupies its own line. Reading flow: The package declaration, explanatory documentation, and interface declaration follow a natural Java convention. Minor documentation verbosity and the long link slightly reduce readability.
Run 3
Code Structure: A logically organized interface with a single, focused method. Nesting: No nested logic, making it easy to scan. Clarity of intent: The interface name, method signature, and Javadoc clearly explain transport-specific SockJS frame formatting, although the method's return value could be documented explicitly. Code length: The implementation is minimal; the documentation is useful but contains slightly awkward wording and a long link. Action granularity: The sole method declaration occupies its own line. Reading flow: The package, explanatory documentation, interface declaration, and method follow a natural order.