CodeAlignBench: Assessing Code Generation Models on Developer-Preferred Code Adjustments

As large language models become increasingly capable of generating code, evaluating their performance remains a complex and evolving challenge. Existing benchmarks primarily focus on functional correctness, overlooking the diversity of real-world coding tasks and developer expectations. To this end, we introduce a multi-language benchmark that evaluates LLM instruction-following capabilities and is extensible to operate on any set of standalone coding problems. Our benchmark evaluates instruction following in two key settings: adherence to pre-defined constraints specified with the initial problem, and the ability to perform refinements based on follow-up instructions. For this paper's analysis, we empirically evaluated our benchmarking pipeline with programming tasks from LiveBench, that are also automatically translated from Python into Java and JavaScript. Our automated benchmark reveals that models exhibit differing levels of performance across multiple dimensions of instruction-following. Our benchmarking pipeline provides a more comprehensive evaluation of code generation models, highlighting their strengths and limitations across languages and generation goals.

Automated Code Fix Suggestions for Accessibility Issues in Mobile Apps

Accessibility is crucial for inclusive app usability, yet developers often struggle to identify and fix app accessibility issues due to a lack of awareness, expertise, and inadequate tools. Current accessibility testing tools can identify accessibility issues but may not always provide guidance on how to address them. We introduce FixAlly, an automated tool designed to suggest source code fixes for accessibility issues detected by automated accessibility scanners. FixAlly employs a multi-agent LLM architecture to generate fix strategies, localize issues within the source code, and propose code modification suggestions to fix the accessibility issue. Our empirical study demonstrates FixAlly's capability in suggesting fixes that resolve issues found by accessibility scanners -- with an effectiveness of 77% in generating plausible fix suggestions -- and our survey of 12 iOS developers finds they would be willing to accept 69.4% of evaluated fix suggestions.