-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 271
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
FIX: Resolve Alias Recursion Issue by Preventing Duplicate Rule Application #1649
Open
cmfrydos
wants to merge
4
commits into
bitburner-official:dev
Choose a base branch
from
cmfrydos:fixaliasrecursion
base: dev
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I really wanted to just merge, but I can't let this go... XD
Don't create a brand-new Set, that will be the same O(N^2) behavior as the array you just replaced. Add the item to the set you have.
Edit: For this to work properly (because there are other checks that happen after), you also have to remove it after you recurse.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I need to think this through, I'm just in love with immutables. But you're right ofc that this is a little expensive.
For the global rules you have to copy, since a global should be able to be applied multiple times. For the local one it might suffice to just add it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If you really can't stand to do mutable stuff, I'm fine with you changing it back to an array. There's no point in doing something more verbose if you're going to be N^2 anyway, and most people won't have lots of deep aliases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh don't merge, there is another bug that will make local rules be applied globally I believe. Sorry that I haven't thought this through carefully before. I was just focused on this single bug.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It shouldn't be hard to fix though, but I'd like to write some more tests to catch it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
based attitude
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There is a point in doing it more verbose: readability. Sets, in contrasts to Arrays, are unique and often used for lookup. So it helps with getting the codes intention.
I think mutating the set for the local aliases is totally fine, but copying is needed for the global ones. I don't believe you can circumvent that.
I will probably finish this tomorrow. It is easy to mess up.
After global rules are applied, subsequent calls to applyAlias should just consider global rules with the exception of a global rule modifying the first token/command. I believe the function might need some restructuring of the execution flow to handle all edge cases.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Regardless of how you end up restructuring, the following should work for mutation without copying: Add the key to the set immediately before recursion, and remove it immediately after.
A quick sketch of why this works: You abort if the key was already present, so there's never an issue of double-removing a key. Thus, the removal always properly reverts to the prior state.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah that's a great approach. I'll probably use that, but then also "unify" the application of local and global rules inside one loop / reduce, to avoid certain edge cases.