package router

import (
	"strings"
	"testing"
)

// routeGrammar carried the same unbounded `ws ::= [ \t\n]*` the phrasing
// grammar did (Vikunja #531). It never ran away in practice because this path
// sends routeRepeatPenalty and the phrasing path sent nothing — an accident,
// not a defence. The bound is the defence.
//
// Unlike responseGrammar this grammar does have one legitimate unbounded
// repetition: `("," ws action)*` in root, because a compound utterance is any
// number of actions and capping it would silently drop the last ask. That one
// is bounded in practice by MaxTokens and by each action being fixed-shape.
// Whitespace has no such excuse.
func TestRouteGrammarWhitespaceIsBounded(t *testing.T) {
	if !strings.Contains(routeGrammar, `ws     ::= [ \t\n]{0,4}`) {
		t.Errorf("the ws rule is not bounded — an unbounded one lets the model emit whitespace to the token cap:\n%s", routeGrammar)
	}
	if strings.Contains(routeGrammar, `[ \t\n]*`) {
		t.Error("routeGrammar still contains an unbounded whitespace repetition")
	}
}

// The penalty stays. It curbs the in-field repetition loop the bound cannot
// reach — a model repeating whole words inside a string rule is still inside
// the grammar — and removing it because the grammar is now bounded would be
// reading this fix as broader than it is.
func TestRouterStillSendsARepeatPenalty(t *testing.T) {
	if routeRepeatPenalty <= 1.0 {
		t.Errorf("routeRepeatPenalty is %v, which is no penalty at all", routeRepeatPenalty)
	}
}