Sample
int-9fd1780c9581-I12
Inline all eligible single-use intermediate local variables
Scores
| Method | Score | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| Posnett | 1 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Scalabrino | 0.928 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Dorn | 0.581 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Mi | 0.226 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| LLOC | 13 | Logical lines; fewer is more readable |
| DeepSeek V4 Pro | 18 | 0–20; mean of three runs |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | 19 | 0–20; mean of three runs |
| BTTF | 0.717 | 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. | 77 | +30.8 |
| Halstead volumeHow much symbolic information the code contains. It combines the total number of operators and values with the number of distinct ones. | 529.661 | −17.479 |
| Byte entropyHow varied the bytes in the source text are. Repeated bytes give a lower value; a more even mixture gives a higher value. | 4.253 | −6.38 |
Intercept 8.87 + feature contributions = 15.811 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(15.811) = 1.
| Score | 0.928 |
|---|
Feature contributions
| Feature | Value | Contribution (log-odds) |
|---|---|---|
| Comment layout frequencyHow frequently the layout switches between lines containing only comments or whitespace and lines containing code. | 77 | −1.69 |
| 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. | 118.962 | −1.374 |
| Comment layout (horizontal)How rapidly the visual pattern of comment characters changes from left to right. | 119 | +1.116 |
| Operator visual areaThe share of the code’s visual area occupied by operators such as +, =, and *. | 0.014 | +0.807 |
| Identifier layout (vertical)How rapidly the visual pattern of identifier characters changes from top to bottom. | 76.842 | +0.664 |
| Number layout frequencyHow rapidly the number of numeric values per line changes through the code. | 1 | +0.398 |
| Indentation frequencyHow rapidly indentation changes from line to line. | 31 | +0.335 |
Intercept 0.07 + feature contributions = 0.326 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(0.326) = 0.581.
| Score | 0.226 |
|---|
| Score | 13 |
|---|
Run 1
The code is well-structured with a clear class purpose and logical organization. It uses flat nesting, minimal lines, and one action per line. Javadoc comments thoroughly explain parameters and return values, making intent unambiguous. The constructor and getters follow natural reading flow, and the use of Objects.requireNonNull is concise and clear. Minor deductions for verbose comments slightly increasing length, but overall the code is highly readable.
Run 2
The code is highly readable with a clear, logical structure typical of a well-documented value object. It maintains flat nesting with no conditional or loop complexity, and each method performs a single action (returning a field). Javadoc comments are extensive, clarifying intent, especially for non-obvious parameters like `networkReceive` and `nowNanos`. The class is concise—only five members including the constructor and getters—and follows a natural reading flow from fields to constructor to accessors. Minor deductions: the `nowNanos` parameter name could be more consistent with the field (`reauthenticationBeginNanos`), and some Javadoc duplication exists between constructor and method comments. Overall, this is clean, maintainable code.
Run 3
The code is well-structured with clear separation of concerns: fields, constructor, and getters. There is no deep nesting, and the reading flow is logical and natural. The intent of each method is apparent from its name and Javadoc. While the Javadoc comments are verbose and somewhat repetitive, they provide useful context. The action granularity is appropriate, with one operation per line. Overall, the code is highly readable, though the length of documentation slightly detracts from conciseness.
Run 1
Code Structure: A logically organized immutable context class with fields, a constructor, and accessors. Nesting: Flat methods with no nested control flow. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names and detailed documentation clearly explain re-authentication state, nullability, and timing semantics. Code length: Implementation is concise, though repeated Javadoc descriptions make the class longer than necessary. Action granularity: Each statement performs one clear action; constructor validation is straightforward. Reading flow: Conventional ordering and consistent formatting support natural reading, with only verbose documentation slightly interrupting the flow.
Run 2
Code Structure: Fields, constructor, and accessors are logically organized in a simple context class. Nesting: No nested control flow; all methods are flat. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names, final fields, explicit null validation, and detailed documentation clearly communicate purpose and constraints. Code length: Implementation is concise, but repeated documentation about networkReceive and timestamp semantics adds unnecessary length. Action granularity: Each assignment and return occupies its own line, making operations easy to identify. Reading flow: The progression from state declaration to initialization to accessors is natural and consistent; lengthy comments slightly interrupt scanning.
Run 3
Code Structure: Clearly organized into immutable fields, a constructor, and focused accessors. Nesting: Flat, with no nested control flow. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names and detailed documentation make the re-authentication context, nullability, and timing semantics explicit. Code length: Implementation is concise, though repeated documentation adds unnecessary length. Action granularity: Each statement performs a single assignment, validation, or return. Reading flow: Natural progression from state definition to initialization and accessors; minor formatting issues, such as the missing blank line after the package declaration and the long constructor signature, slightly reduce readability.