Thesis
Legacy-code modernization becomes more operationally credible when transformation is paired with a separate, inspectable behavioral verification step.
Observed facts
The README lists a workflow from assessment and mapping through reviewed business rules, plan approval, modernization, and verification.
1The README says verification reruns tests from a clean build and compares old and new outputs on the same inputs where the legacy code can run.
1The README says the legacy source is not edited and identifies separate analysis and modernized directories.
1
Mechanism
The plugin makes a post-build verification step rerun tests and compare old and new implementations on shared inputs, with listed masks and recorded accepted differences.
Why now
The plugin makes verification a named stage in an AI-assisted modernization workflow rather than relying on the model’s assertion that a rewrite is correct.
Implications
Teams evaluating AI-assisted migration can assess the verification artifacts and human checkpoints, not just the generated code.
The documented process still depends on buildability, representative inputs, and human decisions; the README does not establish success rates.
Evidence boundary
The public README describes product behavior and intended process, but supplies no independent benchmark or outcome data, and explicitly leaves key decisions to people.
Watch conditions
Watch for published examples showing whether the comparison and test evidence catches meaningful regressions on real migrations.