mcxtzhang/SwipeDelMenuLayout
The most simple SwipeMenu in the history, 0 coupling, support any ViewGroup. Step integration swipe (delete) menu, high imitation QQ, iOS. ~史上最简单侧滑菜单，0耦合，支持任意ViewGroup。一步集成侧滑(删除)菜单，高仿QQ、IOS。~
- Repository: https://github.com/mcxtzhang/SwipeDelMenuLayout
- Commit:
8d3cae22899d7f361bc1482d4fdd8b06f8c5cdec - Generated: 2026-11-13T23:27:38+00:00
- Scorer 0.1.0, scoring prov-4+qual-2+sec-2, report schema v2
Scores
| Pillar | Score | Signal | Confidence | Coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share) | 0 | none-detected | 65% | 100% |
| Code quality | 56 | weak | 90% | 100% |
| Security | 77 | adequate | 85% | 100% |
AI provenance
No AI attribution or AI-consistent velocity signals detected.
- Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 0.0%
- Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 0.0%
- Estimated AI-generated share: 0.0%
| Month | Lines added | Attributed to AI |
|---|---|---|
| 2016-08 | 1,527 | 0% |
| 2016-09 | 744 | 0% |
| 2016-10 | 133 | 0% |
| 2016-11 | 241 | 0% |
| 2016-12 | 69 | 0% |
| 2017-03 | 1 | 0% |
| 2017-09 | 330 | 0% |
AI provenance describes how code was produced; it is not a quality judgment. Unless attribution is explicit, these are signals consistent with AI generation, not proof. Squash/rebase workflows, imported code, and rewritten history reduce accuracy.
Code quality
Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 12% of function code in complex or long functions; 3% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Complexity (lizard) | 69 |
| Duplication | 82 |
| Code smells (Opengrep) | 100 |
| Tests and CI | 2 |
| Documentation | 65 |
| Type safety | n/a |
| Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) | n/a |
- Functions: 83; mean complexity 2.3, 90th percentile 4; 1 complex and 0 long functions
- Duplicated lines: 3.4% of 835 compared
- Tests: 0 test lines for 1,360 source lines (ratio 0.00); CI test commands: none detected; 4% of recent source commits also change tests
- Docs missing or thin: contributing, changelog
Most complex functions:
Security
Security posture is adequate: no high-impact findings. Weakest area: posture.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) | 100 |
| Static analysis (Opengrep) | 86 |
| Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) | n/a |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | n/a |
| Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) | 0 |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | n/a |
- Posture checks passed: lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates, signed commits
Top findings
| Severity | Finding | Location |
|---|---|---|
| medium | opengrep/java.android.security.exported_activity: The application exports an activity. Any application on the device can launch the exported activity which may compromise the integrity of your application or its data. Ensure that any exported activities do not have privileged access to your application's control plane. [confidence medium] |
app/src/main/AndroidManifest.xml:17 |
Static signals only: the scorer never runs the project's code. Secret findings are pattern matches that were not verified, and secret values are never stored.
Repository profile
- Source lines: 1,360; test lines: 0
| Language | Lines |
|---|---|
| Java | 1,360 |