Source code
public class PascalTriangle {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int numRows = 20;
int[][] triangle = new int[numRows][];
for (int i = 0; i < numRows; i++) {
triangle[i] = new int[i + 1];
triangle[i][0] = 1;
for (int j = 1; j < i; j++) {
triangle[i][j] = triangle[i-1][j-1] + triangle[i-1][j];
}
triangle[i][i] = 1;
}
for (int i = 0; i < numRows; i++) {
for (int j = 0; j < triangle[i].length; j++) {
System.out.print(triangle[i][j] + " ");
}
System.out.println();
}
}
}
Run 1
The code has a clear, logical structure: generation and printing are separated. Nesting is limited to two levels in the main loops, which is reasonable for a 2D problem. Variable names like numRows, triangle, i, and j clearly convey intent. The code is concise without sacrificing clarity. Each loop body performs a single logical action, though the boundary assignments (triangle[i][0] and triangle[i][i]) are slightly implicit. Reading flow is natural — top-to-bottom, from initialization to output. Minor deductions: lack of comments explaining the Pascal recurrence and no handling for numRows = 0.
Run 2
The code is well-structured, with clear separation between triangle construction and printing. Nesting is minimal—only two levels deep—and each loop has a single, obvious purpose. Intent is straightforward: generate and display Pascal's triangle. The code is concise, avoiding unnecessary variables or comments while remaining self-explanatory. Each line performs one action, enhancing readability. The reading flow is natural, progressing from initialization to generation to output. Minor deductions: the hardcoded number of rows (20) slightly reduces flexibility, and the absence of a brief explanatory comment on the algorithm may require a moment of thought for unfamiliar readers. Overall, highly readable.
Run 3
The code is clean and logical, with good structure separating generation and printing. Nesting is minimal (two loops, one nested). The intent is clear: build Pascal's triangle using summation of previous row elements and print it. Code length is reasonable and not verbose. Each line performs a single action, improving readability. The main possible improvement is the absence of explanatory comments, though the algorithm is simple enough to infer. Naming is clear and consistent.
Run 1
Code Structure: Logically separates triangle construction from output, though helper methods could make that separation clearer. Nesting: Two straightforward nested-loop sections; depth is modest and appropriate. Clarity of intent: The class name, numRows, and triangle clearly communicate the purpose; conventional i and j indices are easy to follow. Code length: Concise, with no unnecessary logic; setting both endpoints repeats an assignment in the first row but keeps the general pattern simple. Action granularity: Each statement performs one clear action. Reading flow: Initialization, construction, and printing follow a natural sequence, supported by whitespace. Minor readability improvements include consistent spacing around subtraction operators and extracting construction and printing into named methods.
Run 2
Code Structure: Logically separates triangle construction from output, though helper methods could make this separation clearer. Nesting: Two-level loops are shallow and appropriate for the problem. Clarity of intent: The class name, numRows, and triangle clearly communicate the purpose; conventional i and j indices are easy to follow. Code length: Concise, with no unnecessary logic. Action granularity: Each statement performs a single action, and loop headers use standard conventions. Reading flow: Initialization, row construction, and printing follow a natural sequence, aided by blank lines. Minor readability improvements include consistent spacing around subtraction operators and extracting construction and printing into named methods.
Run 3
Code Structure: Generation and printing are clearly separated into sequential loops, though helper methods could make that separation explicit. Nesting: Two-level loops are shallow and appropriate for a triangular array. Clarity of intent: The class name, numRows, and triangle clearly convey the purpose; conventional i and j indices are understandable. Code length: Concise, with no unnecessary logic. Action granularity: Each statement performs a single clear action; loop headers use standard conventions. Reading flow: Initialization, row construction, and output follow a natural order, aided by blank lines. Minor improvements include consistent spacing around subtraction operators and extracting generation and printing into named methods.