Sample

int-4ad78ab8cdf0-I12

Inline all eligible single-use intermediate local variables

Matched original source

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 Pro17.670–20; mean of three runs
GPT-6.1 Sol180–20; 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

The code is highly readable, well-structured, and clearly documented. It follows a logical organization with an abstract base class and clean polymorphism via Active and Inactive chain implementations. The class and method Javadocs are thorough, explaining intent, usage, and tradeoffs. Nesting is minimal and controlled (anonymous class, ternary). Action granularity is strong: each compare method does one clear thing. Reading flow is natural, with sections separated by purpose. The main slight drawback is length—much of it is documentation—but this is appropriate for a public utility API. Clarity of intent is excellent throughout.

Run 2

The code is highly readable. It exhibits excellent structure, with a clear public API and a well-organized abstract class. Nesting is minimal, primarily used for anonymous and static inner classes that logically group implementations. Clarity of intent is strong; method names like 'compareTrueFirst' and 'compareFalseFirst' are explicit, and the extensive Javadoc further explains usage and nuances. Code length is appropriate for a utility class with multiple overloaded methods, each concise. Action granularity is generally one action per line. Reading flow is logical, moving from the main public method 'start', to the active implementation, to inactive implementations, and finally to the abstract method declarations and docs. The use of a ternary in 'classify' is compact but readable. Overall, it is a well-maintained, standard library-style code that is easy to follow.

Run 3

The code is highly readable with a clear, logical structure. The class is well-documented, and the public API is separated from the private implementation details. The use of an abstract class with two concrete implementations (ACTIVE and InactiveComparisonChain) is a clean way to handle the state transition. Nesting is minimal, with the deepest level being the anonymous ACTIVE class, which is still manageable. Each method has a single responsibility and performs one action per line, contributing to a natural reading flow. The code length is appropriate for the functionality provided, avoiding unnecessary verbosity. Minor deductions: the comments could be slightly more concise, and the pattern of having both `compareTrueFirst` and `compareFalseFirst` adds some length but is justified for clarity and API completeness.

Run 1

Code Structure: Logical separation of active comparisons, inactive states, and public API declarations makes the design easy to follow. Nesting: Method bodies are flat; the anonymous class adds modest structural nesting, and the nested ternary slightly reduces clarity. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names, comprehensive documentation, and usage examples clearly explain chaining and short-circuit behavior. Code length: Numerous overloads and extensive documentation make the file long, but most repetition is justified by the API; historical commentary adds some reading overhead. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one clear action per line, with short, focused methods. Reading flow: Consistent formatting and parallel method ordering support scanning, although placing implementations before abstract API declarations requires some navigation. Overall, highly readable, with minor costs from verbosity and implementation indirection.

Run 2

Code Structure: Clearly separates active comparison behavior, inactive states, and the public API; the state-based design is cohesive. 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 make comparison semantics and short-circuit behavior clear. Code length: Individual methods are concise, but repeated overload implementations and extensive documentation increase scanning effort; most repetition is justified by the API. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one clear action per line, with compact comparison-and-classification expressions remaining understandable. Reading flow: Consistent formatting and method ordering support natural reading, though placing implementations before abstract API declarations requires some navigation. Overall, highly readable with minor verbosity and structural indirection.

Run 3

Code Structure: Logical separation of active comparisons, inactive terminal states, and public API declarations makes the implementation well organized. Nesting: Methods are mostly flat; the anonymous implementation and nested ternary in classify add modest complexity. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names, comprehensive documentation, and examples clearly explain chained comparison and early termination. 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 action per line, with comparison and classification naturally combined in return expressions. Reading flow: Consistent formatting and parallel overload ordering support scanning, although placing implementation details before most API declarations requires some navigation. Generic nullness annotations and the unchecked Comparable cast slightly increase reading effort.