Sample

int-fed04478c9a5-I11

Split eligible integer literals into pairs of short-named intermediate variables

Matched original source

Lines162

Scores

MethodScoreScale
Posnett00–1; higher is more readable
Scalabrino0.840–1; higher is more readable
Dorn0.6670–1; higher is more readable
Mi0.0850–1; higher is more readable
LLOC50Logical lines; fewer is more readable
DeepSeek V4 Pro170–20; mean of three runs
GPT-6.1 Sol170–20; mean of three runs
BTTF0.5620–1; higher is more readable

Views

Source code

package io.netty.util.concurrent; import io.netty.util.internal.ObjectUtil; /** * <p>A promise combiner monitors the outcome of a number of discrete futures, then notifies a final, aggregate promise * when all of the combined futures are finished. The aggregate promise will succeed if and only if all of the combined * futures succeed. If any of the combined futures fail, the aggregate promise will fail. The cause failure for the * aggregate promise will be the failure for one of the failed combined futures; if more than one of the combined * futures fails, exactly which cause of failure will be assigned to the aggregate promise is undefined.</p> * * <p>Callers may populate a promise combiner with any number of futures to be combined via the * {@link PromiseCombiner#add(Future)} and {@link PromiseCombiner#addAll(Future[])} methods. When all futures to be * combined have been added, callers must provide an aggregate promise to be notified when all combined promises have * finished via the {@link PromiseCombiner#finish(Promise)} method.</p> * * <p>This implementation is <strong>NOT</strong> thread-safe and all methods must be called * from the {@link EventExecutor} thread.</p> */ public final class PromiseCombiner { private int expectedCount; private int doneCount; private Promise<Void> aggregatePromise; private Throwable cause; private final GenericFutureListener<Future<?>> listener = new GenericFutureListener<Future<?>>() { @Override public void operationComplete(final Future<?> future) { if (executor.inEventLoop()) { operationComplete0(future); } else { executor.execute(new Runnable() { @Override public void run() { operationComplete0(future); } }); } } private void operationComplete0(Future<?> future) { assert executor.inEventLoop(); ++doneCount; if (!future.isSuccess() && cause == null) { cause = future.cause(); } if (doneCount == expectedCount && aggregatePromise != null) { tryPromise(); } } }; private final EventExecutor executor; /** * Deprecated use {@link PromiseCombiner#PromiseCombiner(EventExecutor)}. */ @Deprecated public PromiseCombiner() { this(ImmediateEventExecutor.INSTANCE); } /** * The {@link EventExecutor} to use for notifications. You must call {@link #add(Future)}, {@link #addAll(Future[])} * and {@link #finish(Promise)} from within the {@link EventExecutor} thread. * * @param executor the {@link EventExecutor} to use for notifications. */ public PromiseCombiner(EventExecutor executor) { this.executor = ObjectUtil.checkNotNull(executor, "executor"); } /** * Adds a new promise to be combined. New promises may be added until an aggregate promise is added via the * {@link PromiseCombiner#finish(Promise)} method. * * @param promise the promise to add to this promise combiner * * @deprecated Replaced by {@link PromiseCombiner#add(Future)}. */ @Deprecated public void add(Promise promise) { add((Future) promise); } /** * Adds a new future to be combined. New futures may be added until an aggregate promise is added via the * {@link PromiseCombiner#finish(Promise)} method. * * @param future the future to add to this promise combiner */ @SuppressWarnings({ "unchecked", "rawtypes" }) public void add(Future future) { checkAddAllowed(); checkInEventLoop(); ++expectedCount; future.addListener(listener); } /** * Adds new promises to be combined. New promises may be added until an aggregate promise is added via the * {@link PromiseCombiner#finish(Promise)} method. * * @param promises the promises to add to this promise combiner * * @deprecated Replaced by {@link PromiseCombiner#addAll(Future[])} */ @Deprecated public void addAll(Promise... promises) { addAll((Future[]) promises); } /** * Adds new futures to be combined. New futures may be added until an aggregate promise is added via the * {@link PromiseCombiner#finish(Promise)} method. * * @param futures the futures to add to this promise combiner */ @SuppressWarnings({ "unchecked", "rawtypes" }) public void addAll(Future... futures) { for (Future future : futures) { this.add(future); } } /** * <p>Sets the promise to be notified when all combined futures have finished. If all combined futures succeed, * then the aggregate promise will succeed. If one or more combined futures fails, then the aggregate promise will * fail with the cause of one of the failed futures. If more than one combined future fails, then exactly which * failure will be assigned to the aggregate promise is undefined.</p> * * <p>After this method is called, no more futures may be added via the {@link PromiseCombiner#add(Future)} or * {@link PromiseCombiner#addAll(Future[])} methods.</p> * * @param aggregatePromise the promise to notify when all combined futures have finished */ public void finish(Promise<Void> aggregatePromise) { ObjectUtil.checkNotNull(aggregatePromise, "aggregatePromise"); checkInEventLoop(); if (this.aggregatePromise != null) { throw new IllegalStateException("Already finished"); } this.aggregatePromise = aggregatePromise; if (doneCount == expectedCount) { tryPromise(); } } private void checkInEventLoop() { if (!executor.inEventLoop()) { throw new IllegalStateException("Must be called from EventExecutor thread"); } } private boolean tryPromise() { return (cause == null) ? aggregatePromise.trySuccess(null) : aggregatePromise.tryFailure(cause); } private void checkAddAllowed() { if (aggregatePromise != null) { throw new IllegalStateException("Adding promises is not allowed after finished adding"); } } }

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.3071.679−101.365
Source linesThe number of non-empty source lines.162+64.8
Byte entropyHow varied the bytes in the source text are. Repeated bytes give a lower value; a more even mixture gives a higher value.4.575−6.862

Intercept 8.87 + feature contributions = -34.558 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(-34.558) = 0.

Score0.84

Feature contributions

FeatureValueContribution
(log-odds)
Comment layout frequencyHow frequently the layout switches between lines containing only comments or whitespace and lines containing code.163−4.735
Indentation frequencyHow rapidly indentation changes from line to line.107+2.964
Identifier layout (vertical)How rapidly the visual pattern of identifier characters changes from top to bottom.161.86+1.853
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.119.945−1.415
Comment layout (horizontal)How rapidly the visual pattern of comment characters changes from left to right.115.656+1.062
Operator visual areaThe share of the code’s visual area occupied by operators such as +, =, and *.0.045+0.501
Number layout frequencyHow rapidly the number of numeric values per line changes through the code.1+0.398

Intercept 0.07 + feature contributions = 0.697 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(0.697) = 0.667.

Score0.085
Score50
Run 1

The code is well-structured with clear logical organization: fields, listener, constructors, public API methods, and private helpers are grouped sensibly. Nesting is generally flat, with the deepest level being three (listener -> operationComplete -> executor.execute -> Runnable), which is acceptable. Intent is explicit through meaningful names and thorough Javadoc. Code length is appropriate, though some deprecated overloads add slight verbosity. Action granularity is mostly one action per line, enhancing readability. Reading flow is natural, with public methods following constructors and private helpers at the end. Minor issues: the listener's nested Runnable slightly increases depth, and raw type usage with @SuppressWarnings detracts slightly from clarity.

Run 2

The code is highly readable. It has a clear logical structure with a single-purpose class, well-documented public methods, and private helper methods that encapsulate validation. The nesting is shallow, mostly one level, except inside the anonymous listener where the executor check adds one more level but remains clear. Naming is explicit (expectedCount, doneCount, checkAddAllowed). Each method performs a focused action, and lines generally represent one action. The reading flow is natural, moving from fields to constructors, then add methods, then finish. The Javadoc is comprehensive and clarifies intent, especially about thread-safety and failure semantics. Minor deductions are due to some duplication in method overloads for deprecated types and the slightly dense assertion checks, but overall the code is easy to follow.

Run 3

The code is generally readable and well-structured. The class has a clear single responsibility and Javadoc explains the purpose and thread-safety constraints. Methods are small and focused, with one logical action per line. Nesting is mostly flat, except for the anonymous listener’s operationComplete method, which uses a simple if-else and an inner Runnable—acceptable but slightly deeper. Naming is clear (e.g., expectedCount, doneCount, checkAddAllowed). The only minor readability issues are the long Javadocs and a few deprecated overloads that add slight noise. Overall, the structure and flow make the logic easy to follow.

Run 1

Code Structure: Well-organized class with focused public methods and reusable validation helpers; the large listener initializer slightly interrupts organization. Nesting: Most methods are flat, though anonymous listener and Runnable classes create deeper nesting. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names and thorough documentation clearly explain aggregation, failure handling, and threading requirements; tryPromise is somewhat vague. Code length: Implementation methods are concise, but repeated documentation and deprecated overloads increase reading overhead. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one action per line; the compact ternary in tryPromise remains understandable. Reading flow: Registration, completion tracking, and final notification follow a coherent lifecycle, although asynchronous callbacks and mutable counters require some cross-referencing.

Run 2

Code Structure: Well organized into constructors, public operations, and focused validation/completion helpers, although the substantial listener implementation precedes the constructors. Nesting: Most methods are flat; nested anonymous listener and Runnable classes add localized complexity. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names and thorough documentation explain aggregation, failure handling, and threading constraints; operationComplete0 and tryPromise are less expressive. Code length: Implementation methods are concise, but repeated documentation and deprecated overloads increase overall length. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one action per line, with no compressed multi-statement lines. Reading flow: Consistent formatting and a natural add-to-finish lifecycle make the code easy to follow, though asynchronous callbacks and shared counters require tracking state across methods.

Run 3

Code Structure: Logically organized around adding futures, tracking completion, and resolving the aggregate promise, with validation extracted into helpers. Nesting: Most methods are flat, but the anonymous listener containing an anonymous Runnable creates a locally deep section. Clarity of intent: Descriptive field names, focused methods, and thorough documentation clearly explain aggregation and threading requirements; tryPromise is somewhat vague. Code length: Implementation methods are concise, although repeated documentation and deprecated overloads increase reading overhead. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one action per line, making state changes easy to follow. Reading flow: The public API and private helpers follow a sensible progression, but placing callback logic before constructors and using raw types and casts slightly interrupt readability.