Sample

int-909cbe08b7af-SRC

Unmodified source class

Lines291

Scores

MethodScoreScale
Posnett00–1; higher is more readable
Scalabrino0.8090–1; higher is more readable
Dorn0.040–1; higher is more readable
Mi0.1310–1; higher is more readable
LLOC58Logical lines; fewer is more readable
DeepSeek V4 Pro170–20; mean of three runs
GPT-6.1 Sol17.670–20; mean of three runs
BTTF0.6650–1; higher is more readable

Views

Source code

package com.google.common.collect; import com.google.common.annotations.GwtCompatible; import com.google.common.primitives.Booleans; import com.google.errorprone.annotations.InlineMe; import java.util.Comparator; import org.jspecify.annotations.Nullable; /** * A utility for performing a chained comparison statement. <b>Note:</b> Java 8+ users should * generally prefer the methods in {@link Comparator}; see <a href="#java8">below</a>. * * <p>Example usage of {@code ComparisonChain}: * * {@snippet : * public int compareTo(Foo that) { * return ComparisonChain.start() * .compare(this.aString, that.aString) * .compare(this.anInt, that.anInt) * .compare(this.anEnum, that.anEnum, Ordering.natural().nullsLast()) * .result(); * } * } * * <p>The value of this expression will have the same sign as the <i>first nonzero</i> comparison * result in the chain, or will be zero if every comparison result was zero. * * <p><b>Note:</b> {@code ComparisonChain} instances are <b>immutable</b>. For this utility to work * correctly, calls must be chained as illustrated above. * * <p>Performance note: Even though the {@code ComparisonChain} caller always invokes its {@code * compare} methods unconditionally, the {@code ComparisonChain} implementation stops calling its * inputs' {@link Comparable#compareTo compareTo} and {@link Comparator#compare compare} methods as * soon as one of them returns a nonzero result. This optimization is typically important only in * the presence of expensive {@code compareTo} and {@code compare} implementations. * * <p>See the Guava User Guide article on <a href= * "https://github.com/google/guava/wiki/CommonObjectUtilitiesExplained#comparecompareto">{@code * ComparisonChain}</a>. * * <h4 id="java8">Java 8+ equivalents</h4> * * If you are using Java version 8 or greater, you should generally use the static methods in {@link * Comparator} instead of {@code ComparisonChain}. The example above can be implemented like this: * * {@snippet : * import static java.util.Comparator.comparing; * import static java.util.Comparator.nullsLast; * import static java.util.Comparator.naturalOrder; * * ... * private static final Comparator<Foo> COMPARATOR = * comparing((Foo foo) -> foo.aString) * .thenComparing(foo -> foo.anInt) * .thenComparing(foo -> foo.anEnum, nullsLast(naturalOrder())); * * @Override * public int compareTo(Foo that) { * return COMPARATOR.compare(this, that); * } * } * * <p>With method references it is more succinct: {@code comparing(Foo::aString)} for example. * * <p>Using {@link Comparator} avoids certain types of bugs, for example when you meant to write * {@code .compare(a.foo, b.foo)} but you actually wrote {@code .compare(a.foo, a.foo)} or {@code * .compare(a.foo, b.bar)}. {@code ComparisonChain} also has a potential performance problem that * {@code Comparator} doesn't: it evaluates all the parameters of all the {@code .compare} calls, * even when the result of the comparison is already known from previous {@code .compare} calls. * That can be expensive. * * @author Mark Davis * @author Kevin Bourrillion * @since 2.0 */ @GwtCompatible public abstract class ComparisonChain { private ComparisonChain() {} /** Begins a new chained comparison statement. See example in the class documentation. */ public static ComparisonChain start() { return ACTIVE; } private static final ComparisonChain ACTIVE = new ComparisonChain() { @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") // unsafe; see discussion on supertype @Override public ComparisonChain compare(Comparable<?> left, Comparable<?> right) { return classify(((Comparable<Object>) left).compareTo(right)); } @Override public <T extends @Nullable Object> ComparisonChain compare( @ParametricNullness T left, @ParametricNullness T right, Comparator<T> comparator) { return classify(comparator.compare(left, right)); } @Override public ComparisonChain compare(int left, int right) { return classify(Integer.compare(left, right)); } @Override public ComparisonChain compare(long left, long right) { return classify(Long.compare(left, right)); } @Override public ComparisonChain compare(float left, float right) { return classify(Float.compare(left, right)); } @Override public ComparisonChain compare(double left, double right) { return classify(Double.compare(left, right)); } @Override public ComparisonChain compareTrueFirst(boolean left, boolean right) { return classify(Boolean.compare(right, left)); // reversed } @Override public ComparisonChain compareFalseFirst(boolean left, boolean right) { return classify(Boolean.compare(left, right)); } ComparisonChain classify(int result) { return (result < 0) ? LESS : (result > 0) ? GREATER : ACTIVE; } @Override public int result() { return 0; } }; private static final ComparisonChain LESS = new InactiveComparisonChain(-1); private static final ComparisonChain GREATER = new InactiveComparisonChain(1); private static final class InactiveComparisonChain extends ComparisonChain { final int result; InactiveComparisonChain(int result) { this.result = result; } @Override public ComparisonChain compare(Comparable<?> left, Comparable<?> right) { return this; } @Override public <T extends @Nullable Object> ComparisonChain compare( @ParametricNullness T left, @ParametricNullness T right, Comparator<T> comparator) { return this; } @Override public ComparisonChain compare(int left, int right) { return this; } @Override public ComparisonChain compare(long left, long right) { return this; } @Override public ComparisonChain compare(float left, float right) { return this; } @Override public ComparisonChain compare(double left, double right) { return this; } @Override public ComparisonChain compareTrueFirst(boolean left, boolean right) { return this; } @Override public ComparisonChain compareFalseFirst(boolean left, boolean right) { return this; } @Override public int result() { return result; } } /** * Compares two comparable objects as specified by {@link Comparable#compareTo}, <i>if</i> the * result of this comparison chain has not already been determined. * * <p>This method is declared to accept any 2 {@code Comparable} objects, even if they are not <a * href="https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/collections/interfaces/order.html">mutually * comparable</a>. If you pass objects that are not mutually comparable, this method may throw an * exception. (The reason for this decision is lost to time, but the reason <i>might</i> be that * we wanted to support legacy classes that implement the raw type {@code Comparable} (instead of * implementing {@code Comparable<Foo>}) without producing warnings. If so, we would prefer today * to produce warnings in that case, and we may change this method to do so in the future. Support * for raw {@code Comparable} types in Guava in general is tracked as <a * href="https://github.com/google/guava/issues/989">#989</a>.) * * @throws ClassCastException if the parameters are not mutually comparable */ public abstract ComparisonChain compare(Comparable<?> left, Comparable<?> right); /** * Compares two objects using a comparator, <i>if</i> the result of this comparison chain has not * already been determined. */ public abstract <T extends @Nullable Object> ComparisonChain compare( @ParametricNullness T left, @ParametricNullness T right, Comparator<T> comparator); /** * Compares two {@code int} values as specified by {@link Integer#compare}, <i>if</i> the result * of this comparison chain has not already been determined. */ public abstract ComparisonChain compare(int left, int right); /** * Compares two {@code long} values as specified by {@link Long#compare}, <i>if</i> the result of * this comparison chain has not already been determined. */ public abstract ComparisonChain compare(long left, long right); /** * Compares two {@code float} values as specified by {@link Float#compare}, <i>if</i> the result * of this comparison chain has not already been determined. */ public abstract ComparisonChain compare(float left, float right); /** * Compares two {@code double} values as specified by {@link Double#compare}, <i>if</i> the result * of this comparison chain has not already been determined. */ public abstract ComparisonChain compare(double left, double right); /** * Discouraged synonym for {@link #compareFalseFirst}. * * @deprecated Use {@link #compareFalseFirst}; or, if the parameters passed are being either * negated or reversed, undo the negation or reversal and use {@link #compareTrueFirst}. * @since 19.0 */ @InlineMe(replacement = "this.compareFalseFirst(left, right)") @Deprecated public final ComparisonChain compare(Boolean left, Boolean right) { return compareFalseFirst(left, right); } /** * Compares two {@code boolean} values, considering {@code true} to be less than {@code false}, * <i>if</i> the result of this comparison chain has not already been determined. * * <p>Java 8+ users: you can get the equivalent from {@link Booleans#trueFirst()}. For example: * * <pre> * Comparator.comparing(Foo::isBar, {@link Booleans#trueFirst()}) * </pre> * * @since 12.0 */ public abstract ComparisonChain compareTrueFirst(boolean left, boolean right); /** * Compares two {@code boolean} values, considering {@code false} to be less than {@code true}, * <i>if</i> the result of this comparison chain has not already been determined. * * <p>Java 8+ users: you can get the equivalent from {@link Booleans#falseFirst()}. For example: * * <pre> * Comparator.comparing(Foo::isBar, {@link Booleans#falseFirst()}) * </pre> * * @since 12.0 (present as {@code compare} since 2.0) */ public abstract ComparisonChain compareFalseFirst(boolean left, boolean right); /** * Ends this comparison chain and returns its result: a value having the same sign as the first * nonzero comparison result in the chain, or zero if every result was zero. */ public abstract int result(); }

Loading feature diagnosis…

Source regions

Feature contributions

Feature contributions

FeatureValueContribution
(log-odds)
Halstead volumeHow much symbolic information the code contains. It combines the total number of operators and values with the number of distinct ones.4600.914−151.83
Source linesThe number of non-empty source lines.291+116.4
Byte entropyHow varied the bytes in the source text are. Repeated bytes give a lower value; a more even mixture gives a higher value.4.732−7.097

Intercept 8.87 + feature contributions = -33.658 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(-33.658) = 0.

Score0.809

Feature contributions

FeatureValueContribution
(log-odds)
Comment layout frequencyHow frequently the layout switches between lines containing only comments or whitespace and lines containing code.292−9.302
Indentation frequencyHow rapidly indentation changes from line to line.162+4.866
Identifier layout (vertical)How rapidly the visual pattern of identifier characters changes from top to bottom.290.891+3.656
Number layout frequencyHow rapidly the number of numeric values per line changes through the code.162−3.297
Comment layout (horizontal)How rapidly the visual pattern of comment characters changes from left to right.97.613+0.77
Operator visual areaThe share of the code’s visual area occupied by operators such as +, =, and *.0.033+0.623
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.99.959−0.569

Intercept 0.07 + feature contributions = -3.182 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(-3.182) = 0.04.

Score0.131
Score58
Run 1

This code demonstrates excellent structure and clarity. The class is logically organized with a clear abstract base, well-defined state implementations (ACTIVE, LESS, GREATER), and consistent method overloading. The JavaDoc comments are thorough and provide meaningful context. Nesting is minimal—the only notable nesting is the ternary in classify(), which remains readable. The comparison methods are appropriately granular, with one action per line in most cases. The reading flow is natural, progressing from class documentation through implementation details to method declarations. The code is somewhat verbose due to many abstract method declarations, but this is justified by the API's need for type-specific comparisons. Minor readability challenges include the anonymous ACTIVE class and the non-obvious InactiveComparisonChain pattern, which might require careful study for newcomers. Overall, this is production-quality, maintainable code that balances completeness with clarity.

Run 2

This code is highly readable for a Java utility class. The structure is logical: a private constructor, a single static factory method, an anonymous active implementation, and a private inactive subclass. Public abstract methods are grouped with clear Javadoc, and internal implementations are compact. Nesting is minimal, limited to the anonymous class and the ternary in 'classify'. Intent is explicit—each method name and comment describes behavior concisely. Code length is justified by the class's API surface; repetition in overrides is unavoidable but short. Action granularity follows one-action-per-line mostly, though the ternary packs three branches. Reading flow is natural: start(), compare overloads, result(). The main readability hit comes from verbose Javadocs and annotations, but these are contextual and not core logic. Overall, it's clean, idiomatic Guava code that balances type safety, documentation, and implementation brevity.

Run 3

The code is highly readable for a utility class. Its structure is logical: a clean public API with extensive documentation, followed by private static implementations. Nesting is minimal—the anonymous ACTIVE class and private InactiveComparisonChain are shallow and well-separated. Intent is very clear due to the comprehensive Javadocs, method names, and the comparison chain pattern itself. Code length is justified by the documentation and the need to overload primitive types; it is not unnecessarily verbose. Action granularity is excellent, with one action per line in most methods (e.g., 'return classify(...)'). Reading flow is natural: class docs, constants, helper classes, then the public abstract methods. The only minor deduction is the large amount of documentation relative to executable code, which can feel dense when scanning.

Run 1

Code Structure: Logically separates active comparisons, inactive terminal states, and public API declarations; the state-based design avoids tangled conditionals. Nesting: Methods are shallow, although the anonymous active implementation and nested ternary in classify add modest complexity. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names, consistent overloads, and detailed documentation clearly explain chained comparisons and short-circuit behavior; generic annotations and the unchecked cast require extra attention. Code length: Individual methods are concise, but repeated overloads and extensive documentation make the class lengthy, largely for legitimate API coverage. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one clear action per line; classify compresses multiple decisions into one expression. Reading flow: Consistent formatting and parallel implementations support scanning, though placing implementations before public declarations and separating related methods across sections requires some navigation.

Run 2

Code Structure: Clearly separates active comparison behavior, inactive terminal states, and the public API. Nesting: Methods are shallow; the anonymous implementation and nested ternary in classify add minor complexity. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names, explicit boolean ordering methods, and thorough documentation explain chaining and short-circuit behavior well. Code length: Individual methods are concise, but repeated overloads and extensive documentation make the class lengthy, largely justified by API coverage. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one clear operation per line; classify compresses multiple decisions into one expression. Reading flow: Consistent formatting and overload ordering support scanning, though placing implementation details before public API declarations requires some backtracking.

Run 3

Code Structure: Clear separation between active comparison behavior, inactive states, and public API declarations; the state-based design is logically organized. Nesting: Methods are mostly flat, although the anonymous class and nested ternary add minor complexity. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names, consistent overloads, and thorough documentation explain chaining, ordering, and short-circuit behavior well. Code length: Individual methods are concise, but repeated overload implementations and extensive documentation make the file lengthy, largely justified by API coverage. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one focused action per line; comparison and classification are combined naturally in return expressions. Reading flow: Consistent formatting and method ordering support predictable reading, though placing implementation details before abstract API declarations requires some navigation. Overall, highly readable with modest overhead from boilerplate, generic annotations, and the anonymous implementation.