Sample
pyint-88b07c856030-I11
Split eligible integer literals into pairs of short-named intermediate variables
Scores
| Method | Score | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| Posnett | 0 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Dorn | 0.764 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Mi | 0.138 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| LLOC | 36 | Logical lines; fewer is more readable |
| DeepSeek V4 Pro | 17.33 | 0–20; mean of three runs |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | 17.33 | 0–20; mean of three runs |
| BTTF | 0.722 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
Views
Loading feature diagnosis…
Source regions
Feature contributions
Feature contributions
| Feature | Value | Contribution (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. | 1634.205 | −53.929 |
| Source linesThe number of non-empty source lines. | 56 | +22.4 |
| Byte entropyHow varied the bytes in the source text are. Repeated bytes give a lower value; a more even mixture gives a higher value. | 4.701 | −7.052 |
Intercept 8.87 + feature contributions = -29.71 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(-29.71) = 0.
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. | 57 | −0.982 |
| Comment layout (horizontal)How rapidly the visual pattern of comment characters changes from left to right. | 97.333 | +0.766 |
| Indentation frequencyHow rapidly indentation changes from line to line. | 42 | +0.716 |
| 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. | 98.93 | −0.525 |
| Number layout frequencyHow rapidly the number of numeric values per line changes through the code. | 1 | +0.398 |
| Identifier layout (vertical)How rapidly the visual pattern of identifier characters changes from top to bottom. | 55.84 | +0.371 |
| Operator visual areaThe share of the code’s visual area occupied by operators such as +, =, and *. | 0.06 | +0.361 |
Intercept 0.07 + feature contributions = 1.174 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(1.174) = 0.764.
| Score | 0.138 |
|---|
| Score | 36 |
|---|
Run 1
The code is well-structured and readable. It uses clear class and method names, proper type hints, and concise docstrings. Nesting is minimal, with only one level inside the decorator. Action granularity is good, with one main action per line. The reading flow is natural, progressing from imports to class definition to method overrides. Minor deductions: the decorator closure adds slight indirection, and type-ignore comments add noise. The `super(AppGroup, self).command` call is explicit but slightly verbose compared to `super().command`. Overall, the code is clean, maintainable, and easy to follow for developers familiar with Click and Flask.
Run 2
The code is highly readable with clear structure and purpose. It is well-documented with descriptive docstrings that explain the differences from the parent class. The two methods are short, focused, and avoid deep nesting. Type hints are used consistently, and the logic in each method is straightforward—either wrapping a function with an application context or setting a default class. The only minor issues are the `# type: ignore` comments and some long signatures, which slightly reduce flow but are common in typed Python projects. Overall it follows a natural reading order and maintains one action per line.
Run 3
The code is highly readable with clear class and method names, concise docstrings, and logical organization. It uses minimal nesting, maintains a flat structure, and each action is clearly separated. Type hints and comments improve clarity, and the code length is appropriate for the functionality. The reading flow is natural, starting with imports and progressing to class definition and methods. Minor deductions for the reliance on type ignore comments and slightly dense import block, but overall the code is well-structured and maintainable.
Run 1
Code Structure: The class cleanly separates command wrapping from group configuration, although many imports are unused in this excerpt. Nesting: Shallow overall; the nested decorator and single conditional are appropriate. Clarity of intent: Descriptive method names, type annotations, and useful docstrings explain the behavior, though with_appcontext is not defined in the excerpt. Code length: Methods are concise, but the lengthy import list adds visual overhead. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one action per line; the chained superclass command invocation is slightly dense. Reading flow: Methods follow a natural progression from configuration to execution and return, although missing blank lines between import groups and before the class reduce visual separation.
Run 2
Code Structure: The class cleanly separates command and group behavior, although the many imports unused in this snippet add clutter. Nesting: Shallow nesting, with only a decorator closure and a single conditional, is easy to follow. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names, type annotations, and focused docstrings clearly explain application-context wrapping and group defaults. Code length: The implementation is concise; documentation and typing add useful context, though some signatures are visually dense. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one action each, but the chained superclass command invocation combines decorator creation and application. Reading flow: Consistent formatting and straightforward control flow make reading natural. The explicit super call inside the closure and type-ignore comments introduce minor visual and conceptual friction.
Run 3
Code Structure: The class cleanly separates command and group customization, although many imports are unused in this excerpt. Nesting: Shallow overall; the nested decorator and single conditional are easy to follow. Clarity of intent: Descriptive method names, type annotations, and informative docstrings explain application-context wrapping and the default group class. Code length: Methods are concise, but the extensive import block adds visual overhead relative to the functionality shown. Action granularity: Most lines perform one action; the chained superclass command invocation and callback application are slightly dense. Reading flow: The progression from imports to class documentation and related methods is natural. Long type signatures, type-ignore comments, and framework-specific decorator mechanics introduce minor reading friction.