Sample
pyint-495589ef950f-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 | 0.58 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Mi | 0.443 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| LLOC | 17 | Logical lines; fewer is more readable |
| DeepSeek V4 Pro | 17 | 0–20; mean of three runs |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | 18 | 0–20; mean of three runs |
| BTTF | 0.743 | 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. | 901.892 | −29.762 |
| Source linesThe number of non-empty source lines. | 24 | +9.6 |
| Byte entropyHow varied the bytes in the source text are. Repeated bytes give a lower value; a more even mixture gives a higher value. | 4.562 | −6.843 |
Intercept 8.87 + feature contributions = -18.136 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(-18.136) = 0.
Feature contributions
| Feature | Value | Contribution (log-odds) |
|---|---|---|
| Comment layout (horizontal)How rapidly the visual pattern of comment characters changes from left to right. | 0 | −0.804 |
| Number layout frequencyHow rapidly the number of numeric values per line changes through the code. | 1 | +0.398 |
| Operator visual areaThe share of the code’s visual area occupied by operators such as +, =, and *. | 0.058 | +0.383 |
| Comment layout frequencyHow frequently the layout switches between lines containing only comments or whitespace and lines containing code. | 25 | +0.151 |
| 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. | 84 | +0.107 |
| Indentation frequencyHow rapidly indentation changes from line to line. | 24 | +0.093 |
| Identifier layout (vertical)How rapidly the visual pattern of identifier characters changes from top to bottom. | 23.906 | −0.076 |
Intercept 0.07 + feature contributions = 0.322 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(0.322) = 0.58.
| Score | 0.443 |
|---|
| Score | 17 |
|---|
Run 1
The code demonstrates good readability. Structure is logical: imports are grouped, and the class has a clear purpose. Nesting is minimal—only one nested call inside `get_by_natural_key`, which is necessary and clearly formatted. Intent is clear: the manager retrieves a permission by its natural key components. Code length is concise; no extra methods or comments are needed. Action granularity is appropriate: one meaningful action per line, with keyword arguments kept on separate lines for clarity. Reading flow is natural—signature, return, and nested call follow a top-to-bottom order. Minor deductions: unused imports (`auth`, `AbstractBaseUser`, etc.) could confuse readers, and the `use_in_migrations = True` line lacks context for novices, but these are minor. Overall, the code is well-structured and easy to follow.
Run 2
The code is highly readable overall. It has a clear, flat structure with a single class and one method, avoiding unnecessary nesting. The purpose is explicit: it defines a custom model manager for permissions with natural key lookup. The method name 'get_by_natural_key' clearly communicates intent, and parameters are descriptive. The one action in the method is split across multiple lines for readability, with the nested call to get_by_natural_key cleanly formatted. Imports are standard and well-organized. Minor deductions: the long chained call (`ContentType.objects.db_manager(self.db).get_by_natural_key(...)`) could be slightly more readable with intermediate variables, and there is a lack of type hints or docstrings which would improve clarity for maintainers. Overall, excellent adherence to style guides (PEP8) and consistent formatting.
Run 3
The code is well-structured with logical import grouping and a single, clearly named class. Nesting is minimal—the only slightly deeper call is within get_by_natural_key, where content type retrieval wraps across three lines but reads clearly. Intent is unambiguous: a custom manager for natural key lookups. Length is concise; no unnecessary code exists. Action granularity is good—arguments are laid out one per line in the final call, enhancing scanability. Reading flow is natural: imports, class declaration, then method definition with a straightforward return. Deductions come from minor density in the nested get_by_natural_key call and lack of a docstring clarifying the method’s role beyond its name.
Run 1
Code Structure: Imports precede a focused manager class, providing logical organization, although many imports are unused in this snippet. Nesting: Minimal class/method nesting; the nested lookup remains easy to follow. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names clearly communicate retrieving a permission by its natural key, though understanding the lookup requires Django familiarity. Code length: The implementation is concise, but the extensive import list adds unnecessary length relative to the shown functionality. Action granularity: Assignments and return logic are separated appropriately, and keyword arguments appear on individual lines. Reading flow: Conventional formatting and indentation guide the reader naturally from the manager configuration to the lookup method.
Run 2
Code Structure: Imports precede a clearly organized manager class and its method, though most imports are unused in this snippet. Nesting: Shallow structural nesting; the nested lookup adds only modest complexity. Clarity of intent: Descriptive class, method, and parameter names clearly convey a natural-key permission lookup, although Django knowledge helps. Code length: The implementation is concise, but excess imports add clutter. Action granularity: Operations are cleanly formatted; embedding the content-type lookup within self.get combines two lookups in one expression but remains understandable. Reading flow: Conventional organization and consistent indentation make the code easy to follow, with the multiline return accommodating the longer lookup naturally.
Run 3
Code Structure: Imports and the manager class are logically organized, although many imports are unused in this snippet. Nesting: The method has no nested control flow; the nested lookup call is shallow and well formatted. Clarity of intent: Descriptive class, method, and parameter names clearly communicate retrieval of a permission by its natural key. Code length: The implementation is concise, but the unused imports add unnecessary length. Action granularity: The method combines a content-type lookup with permission retrieval, yet multiline formatting makes both operations easy to distinguish. Reading flow: The code reads naturally from imports to class configuration to lookup implementation; an additional blank line before the top-level class would improve visual separation.