Service Overview

Refactoring AI

FPT Automotive's refactoring-ai automates code review, MISRA-C compliance, design documentation, and cross-platform porting for ECU/SoC migration. Integrates static analysis (SonarQube) with LLMs (GPT-4, Claude) across GitHub, GitLab, and Azure DevOps. Connects browser-based IDEs, DevBoxes, GHA CI, and SILS boards under Entra ID governance. Redesigns code reviews from 200–300 hours manual effort to 2–3 hours per 100K LOC, saving up to 90% in time and 97% in costs.

LLMStatic AnalysisMISRA-CCode Review

90%

Review time reduction

2-3 hours

Review time per 100K LOC

80%

Defect coverage rate

30-40%

Shorter dev cycles

97%

Cost savings vs manual

Capabilities

Key capabilities

Static Analysis Integration

Combines traditional static analysis tools with LLM semantic understanding for comprehensive code analysis.

MISRA Compliance

Automatically identifies and fixes MISRA violations in automotive C/C++ code.

Legacy Code Modernization

Transforms legacy code to modern standards while preserving functionality.

Automated Refactoring

AI-driven refactoring suggestions with automated implementation via AST manipulation.

Quality Verification

Automated verification of refactoring results to ensure correctness and no regression.

Technology

Technology stack

Refactoring AI architecture diagram
Component Technology
Static Analysis SonarQube, Clang Static Analyzer
LLM GPT-4, Claude
Refactoring AST manipulation, Code generation
Verification Unit tests, Static verification
Development Python, C++, Java

Use cases

Real-world applications

Documented outcomes from actual deployments.

1

AI Code Review — 90% Time Reduction

Cloud AI replaced manual code review for 100K+ line codebases — cutting analysis from 200–300 hours to 2–3 hours while maintaining ~80% defect coverage. Engineers shift from surface reviews to high-level architecture decisions.

Before

200–300 hours manual review, $7K–9K cost per 100K LOC, diverting engineering resources

After

2–3 hours Cloud AI analysis, $250–500 cost, engineers focus on architecture

90% time reduction
$250–500 vs $7K–9K manual
2

Development Cycle Acceleration

Refactoring AI integrated into development phases — requirements analysis, design, and testing — reducing the 14–22 month traditional cycle and cutting defect rates across projects.

Before

14–22 month development cycles, high defect rates, missed deadlines

After

30–40% shorter development cycles, 25–40% fewer defects

30–40% cycle reduction
25–40% fewer defects
3

MISRA-C Compliance & LLM Code Analysis

LLMs combined with static analysis for deep semantic code understanding — automated MISRA-C compliance checks, design documentation generation, and architectural gap reporting across codebases.

Before

Manual compliance verification, fragmented documentation, slow code comprehension

After

Automated MISRA-C checks, AI-generated docs, faster architectural understanding

MISRA-C compliance automated
LLM+AST semantic analysis

How we work

Implementation approach

1

Phase 1: Codebase Analysis

  • Analyze existing codebase and identify quality issues
  • Assess MISRA compliance and technical debt
  • Plan refactoring strategy and priorities
2

Phase 2: Refactoring Development

  • Develop refactoring rules and transformations
  • Create automated refactoring implementations
  • Validate refactoring correctness
3

Phase 3: Integration & Testing

  • Integrate with development workflow
  • Conduct comprehensive testing of refactored code
  • Ensure no functionality regression
4

Phase 4: Deployment & Monitoring

  • Deploy to development teams
  • Monitor code quality improvements
  • Continuously improve refactoring rules

Explore more

Related services