Patterns the Algorithm Feels

Metrics tell the algorithm how much and how complex. But patterns tell it what kind. The algorithm detects over 15 distinct code patterns, each carrying its own visual signature. These patterns emerge from the way you solve problems — the structures you reach for, the idioms you prefer, the architectural decisions you make (often without thinking). Each pattern adds a unique texture to the final artwork.

Recursion creates repeating motifs that diminish into distance, with mirror symmetry that echoes the self-referential nature of the code. Deep nesting translates to concentric archways receding into visual depth — each level of indentation becomes another ring of the composition. Many small functions create the visual effect of a mosaic — dozens of small, polished tiles forming a larger coherent image. Class hierarchies produce layered, stratified compositions with clear visual hierarchy.

Async and await patterns create multiple flowing streams — branching rivers that diverge and reconverge across the canvas. Error handling translates to fortified stone walls and arched protective gateways — visual metaphors for the safety nets your code builds. Event-driven architectures produce ripples spreading across still water — each event a disturbance that propagates outward. Heavy conditional logic creates branching paths and forking roads.

Data-heavy code — arrays, dictionaries, database schemas — translates to abundant vessels and containers, visual metaphors for storage and organization. Type annotations and generics create precise, crystalline structures — clean edges and defined boundaries. Functional programming patterns produce flowing, mathematical compositions with smooth curves and elegant transitions. Each data pattern carries its own visual vocabulary.

Not all patterns carry equal visual weight. Some — like recursion and async patterns — produce highly distinctive visual signatures. Others — like simple variable declarations — contribute subtle background texture. The algorithm assigns weights based on visual impact and uniqueness. Rare patterns in your code stand out more; common patterns form the foundation. The result is that the patterns you didn't consciously choose still influence the art. Your coding habits have a visual fingerprint.