Sample
pyint-1a26e61e493f-I13
Lower every eligible synchronous for loop to a while loop
Scores
| Method | Score | Scale |
|---|---|---|
| Posnett | 0 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Dorn | 0.461 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| Mi | 0.357 | 0–1; higher is more readable |
| LLOC | 79 | Logical lines; fewer is more readable |
| DeepSeek V4 Pro | 16.67 | 0–20; mean of three runs |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | 18 | 0–20; mean of three runs |
| BTTF | 0.658 | 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. | 4290.036 | −141.571 |
| Source linesThe number of non-empty source lines. | 146 | +58.4 |
| Byte entropyHow varied the bytes in the source text are. Repeated bytes give a lower value; a more even mixture gives a higher value. | 4.314 | −6.472 |
Intercept 8.87 + feature contributions = -80.773 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(-80.773) = 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. | 147 | −4.168 |
| Indentation frequencyHow rapidly indentation changes from line to line. | 132 | +3.829 |
| Number layout frequencyHow rapidly the number of numeric values per line changes through the code. | 133 | −2.631 |
| Identifier layout (vertical)How rapidly the visual pattern of identifier characters changes from top to bottom. | 145.845 | +1.629 |
| Comment layout (horizontal)How rapidly the visual pattern of comment characters changes from left to right. | 82.912 | +0.533 |
| Operator visual areaThe share of the code’s visual area occupied by operators such as +, =, and *. | 0.053 | +0.43 |
| 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. | 82.946 | +0.152 |
Intercept 0.07 + feature contributions = -0.157 (log-odds).
Score = sigmoid(-0.157) = 0.461.
| Score | 0.357 |
|---|
| Score | 79 |
|---|
Run 1
The code is generally well-structured and readable, benefiting from clear method separation and descriptive docstrings. However, it has a few areas that reduce clarity. The get_queryset method contains nested conditionals and multiple responsibilities (querying and ordering), which makes it slightly harder to follow. The paginate_queryset method has a try-except with a nested conditional, and the loop-free flow is mostly linear but occasionally dense. Variable naming is clear, and each line tends to represent one action, but some lines combine multiple operations. Overall, it's clear and maintainable, though not as flat or concise as it could be.
Run 2
This Django mixin is highly readable. The code structure is logical, grouping queryset acquisition, ordering, pagination, and context preparation into distinct methods. Nesting is minimal; conditional branches are shallow and clear. Purpose is explicit through descriptive method names and thorough docstrings. While the methods are not overly concise, the verbosity is justified by the framework's configurability and error handling. Action granularity is mostly one action per line; a few lines combine operations (e.g., extracting the page number) but remain clear. The reading flow follows a natural top-to-bottom progression from queryset to context. Minor deductions are for the `paginate_queryset` method, where pagination and exception handling create slightly dense logic, and the conditional assignments in `get_queryset` could be marginally simpler. Overall, this code is approachable, well-documented, and maintainable.
Run 3
The code demonstrates strong readability with clear, logical structure and well-documented methods. It follows a flat, non-nested pattern with separate methods for distinct responsibilities. Intent is explicit through descriptive method names and comprehensive docstrings. The pagination logic, while slightly complex, is broken into digestible chunks. Most lines perform a single action, and reading flow follows a natural progression from queryset retrieval through pagination to context building. Minor deductions for the `get_queryset()` conditional chain and the dense `paginate_queryset()` error handling, which require slightly more cognitive effort to parse. Overall, this is clean, maintainable code typical of well-designed Django class-based views.
Run 1
Code Structure: Well-organized mixin with focused methods separating queryset selection, pagination, configuration, and context construction. Nesting: Mostly shallow, with modest nesting in queryset selection and page validation. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names, docstrings, and explicit error messages make responsibilities clear; Django-specific conventions and the pagination return tuple require some familiarity. Code length: Generally appropriate, though simple configuration getters and duplicated context dictionaries add verbosity. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one action each; chained page lookup and tuple unpacking are compact but understandable. Reading flow: Methods follow a logical progression, with consistent formatting and straightforward control flow. Minor drawbacks include reusing 'page' for both input and a page object, and 'queryset' for potentially different iterable types.
Run 2
Code Structure: Well-organized mixin with focused methods separating queryset retrieval, pagination, configuration, and context construction. Nesting: Mostly shallow, with limited nested conditionals and straightforward exception handling. Clarity of intent: Descriptive names, docstrings, and informative error messages make responsibilities clear; Django internals and the pagination return tuple require some framework knowledge. Code length: Generally concise, though configuration getters and duplicated context dictionary keys add modest verbosity. Action granularity: Statements typically perform one action each; tuple unpacking and chained page-source selection are compact but understandable. Reading flow: Methods follow a coherent progression from data retrieval to pagination and context assembly, with consistent formatting. Minor friction comes from reusing 'page' for both input and a page object, and 'queryset' for both the original queryset and paginated results.
Run 3
Code Structure: Well-organized mixin with focused methods separating querying, pagination, configuration, and context construction. Nesting: Generally shallow, with modest branching in queryset selection and pagination error handling. Clarity of intent: Descriptive method names, configuration attributes, and docstrings communicate purpose clearly; Django-specific conventions require some framework knowledge. Code length: Mostly concise, although simple accessor methods and repeated context dictionary keys add verbosity. Action granularity: Statements generally perform one action each; tuple unpacking and chained page-source selection are compact but understandable. Reading flow: Consistent formatting and logical progression make the code easy to follow, though helper-method indirection and inherited behavior require occasional navigation.