F-r-ldraledigplannerare/backend/tests/unit/test_services/test_allocation_excluded_days.py

"""The allocator must never re-place a day the user removed by hand.

User's requirement, verbatim: "removing a single day should stay permanent.
Even if it's an auto added period day." The wish still says "a full week", so
without `AllocationInput.excluded_days` the next `POST /api/plan/sync` simply
re-derives the removed date — which is exactly what these tests pin down.

Two decisions are asserted here, both explained at length on
`_Ledger._excluded_window_dates`:

1. **The parent is part of the key.** A both-parents window places one day
   per parent on the same date; removing one parent's day leaves the
   partner's standing. A date only leaves the window entirely when no
   responsible parent may take it.
2. **An excluded date shrinks the window's target; it is not a shortfall.**
   A day the user removed is not a day the plan failed to fund, so
   `shortfall_days` must not grow (which would make the new shortfall
   remedies advise freeing resources for a day nobody wants, and would make
   `sync_plan` report a deliberate removal as a genuinely evicted/displaced
   row instead of an ordinary self-caused one).
"""

from datetime import date

from app.services.allocation_service import Allocator, DayPool, VacationBudget
from tests.unit.test_services.test_allocation_service import _build_input, _child, _parent, _wish

# Feb 2027 is the suite's clean "no red-day interference" month; Feb 1-7 2027
# is Mon-Sun, so 5 spendable days + Sat 6 + Sun 7.
_WINDOW_START = (2, 1)
_WINDOW_END = (2, 7)
_REMOVED = date(2027, 2, 3)  # a Wednesday in the middle of the window


def _solo_scenario(*, excluded: frozenset | None = None, reuse=None):
    """A one-parent, one-week fixed window.

    `reuse` takes a `(child, parent)` pair from an earlier call so a test can
    build two inputs that are identical down to the uuids — needed both for a
    before/after comparison and for the determinism check, since `_Ledger`
    mutates its copies of the pool/vacation dicts in place and every
    `propose()` run therefore needs its own fresh input.
    """
    if reuse is not None:
        child, parent = reuse
    else:
        child, parent = _child(birth_date=date(2025, 6, 1)), _parent(name="Solo")
    wish = _wish(
        child_id=child.id,
        name="Sportlov",
        start=_WINDOW_START,
        end=_WINDOW_END,
        weeks=1,
        first_year=2027,
        parent_mode="specific",
        parent_uuid=parent.uuid,
    )
    alloc_input = _build_input(
        today=date(2027, 1, 1),
        horizon_end=date(2027, 12, 31),
        children=[child],
        parents=[parent],
        pools={(parent.uuid, child.id): DayPool(200, 90, 60)},
        vacation={(parent.uuid, 2027): VacationBudget(25, 0, 0)},
        wishes=[wish],
        excluded_days=excluded,
    )
    return alloc_input, parent, child


def _both_scenario(*, excluded: frozenset | None = None, reuse=None):
    """A both-parents ("co-leave") one-week fixed window; `reuse` as above."""
    if reuse is not None:
        child, parent_a, parent_b = reuse
    else:
        child = _child(birth_date=date(2025, 6, 1))
        parent_a = _parent(name="A")
        parent_b = _parent(name="B")
    wish = _wish(
        child_id=child.id,
        name="Tillsammans",
        start=_WINDOW_START,
        end=_WINDOW_END,
        weeks=1,
        first_year=2027,
        parent_mode="both",
    )
    alloc_input = _build_input(
        today=date(2027, 1, 1),
        horizon_end=date(2027, 12, 31),
        children=[child],
        parents=[parent_a, parent_b],
        pools={
            (parent_a.uuid, child.id): DayPool(200, 90, 60),
            (parent_b.uuid, child.id): DayPool(200, 90, 60),
        },
        vacation={
            (parent_a.uuid, 2027): VacationBudget(25, 0, 0),
            (parent_b.uuid, 2027): VacationBudget(25, 0, 0),
        },
        wishes=[wish],
        excluded_days=excluded,
    )
    return alloc_input, parent_a, parent_b, child


class TestExcludedDayIsNeverPlaced:
    def test_solo_window_skips_the_removed_date(self) -> None:
        baseline_input, parent, child = _solo_scenario()
        baseline = Allocator().propose(baseline_input)
        assert _REMOVED in {d.date for d in baseline.days if d.day_type != "free"}

        alloc_input, parent, child = _solo_scenario(
            excluded=frozenset({(parent.uuid, child.id, _REMOVED)}), reuse=(child, parent)
        )
        proposal = Allocator().propose(alloc_input)

        assert _REMOVED not in {d.date for d in proposal.days}
        # The rest of the window is untouched.
        assert {d.date for d in proposal.days if d.day_type != "free"} == {
            date(2027, 2, 1),
            date(2027, 2, 2),
            date(2027, 2, 4),
            date(2027, 2, 5),
        }

    def test_removed_date_is_not_reported_as_a_shortfall(self) -> None:
        """Decision: an excluded date reduces the window's target.

        The user removed it; the plan did not fail to fund it. If this
        counted as a gap, `_build_remedies` would start proposing ways to
        free up resources for a day nobody wants, and `sync_plan` would
        misreport the removal as a genuinely evicted/displaced row.
        """
        _seed, parent, child = _solo_scenario()
        alloc_input, _p, _c = _solo_scenario(
            excluded=frozenset({(parent.uuid, child.id, _REMOVED)}), reuse=(child, parent)
        )
        proposal = Allocator().propose(alloc_input)

        outcome = proposal.outcomes[0]
        assert outcome.shortfall_days == 0
        # None of the three genuinely shortfall-gated remedies fire for a
        # zero-shortfall window -- the exclusion did not create a gap to
        # remedy. This used to be `remedies == []` outright, but the
        # `shift_window_into_free_days` suggestion (§todo item, red-day
        # shift toast) is deliberately NOT shortfall-gated for a `fixed`
        # window any more: a fully-funded fixed window can still surface
        # "moving this frees N days", and this Feb 1-7 window genuinely has
        # a cheaper nearby placement. See `_Ledger._build_remedies`.
        assert {r.kind for r in outcome.remedies} <= {"shift_window_into_free_days"}
        assert not any(
            r.kind in {"reduce_preschool_reserve", "carry_vacation_forward", "lower_priority_wish"}
            for r in outcome.remedies
        )
        # `weeks_funded` still tells the truth about what was actually
        # placed: 6 of the window's 7 days (4 funded + Sat + Sun).
        assert outcome.weeks_funded == round(6 / 7, 2)

    def test_an_unrelated_parents_exclusion_does_not_touch_this_window(self) -> None:
        _seed, parent, child = _solo_scenario()
        alloc_input, _p, _c = _solo_scenario(
            excluded=frozenset({(_parent(name="Stranger").uuid, child.id, _REMOVED)}),
            reuse=(child, parent),
        )
        proposal = Allocator().propose(alloc_input)

        assert _REMOVED in {d.date for d in proposal.days if d.day_type != "free"}
        assert proposal.outcomes[0].shortfall_days == 0


class TestExclusionIsKeyedPerParent:
    def test_both_parents_window_keeps_the_partners_day(self) -> None:
        """The parent-keying decision, stated as a test.

        Removing "this day" from A's band must not silently cancel B's leave
        on the same date — B never asked for that, and on a shared plan they
        would only discover it by noticing the hole.
        """
        alloc_input, parent_a, parent_b, child = _both_scenario()
        baseline = Allocator().propose(alloc_input)
        baseline_on_date = [d for d in baseline.days if d.date == _REMOVED]
        assert {d.parent_personal_data_uuid for d in baseline_on_date} == {
            parent_a.uuid,
            parent_b.uuid,
        }

        alloc_input, parent_a, parent_b, child = _both_scenario(
            excluded=frozenset({(parent_a.uuid, child.id, _REMOVED)}),
            reuse=(child, parent_a, parent_b),
        )
        proposal = Allocator().propose(alloc_input)

        on_date = [d for d in proposal.days if d.date == _REMOVED]
        assert [d.parent_personal_data_uuid for d in on_date] == [parent_b.uuid]
        assert on_date[0].day_type != "free"

    def test_the_date_leaves_the_window_only_when_both_parents_are_removed(self) -> None:
        _seed, parent_a, parent_b, child = _both_scenario()
        alloc_input, _a, _b, _c = _both_scenario(
            excluded=frozenset(
                {
                    (parent_a.uuid, child.id, _REMOVED),
                    (parent_b.uuid, child.id, _REMOVED),
                }
            ),
            reuse=(child, parent_a, parent_b),
        )
        proposal = Allocator().propose(alloc_input)

        assert _REMOVED not in {d.date for d in proposal.days}
        assert proposal.outcomes[0].shortfall_days == 0

    def test_one_parents_exclusion_is_not_a_shortfall_for_the_window(self) -> None:
        _seed, parent_a, parent_b, child = _both_scenario()
        alloc_input, _a, _b, _c = _both_scenario(
            excluded=frozenset({(parent_a.uuid, child.id, _REMOVED)}),
            reuse=(child, parent_a, parent_b),
        )
        proposal = Allocator().propose(alloc_input)

        assert proposal.outcomes[0].shortfall_days == 0


class TestSwapWindowDoesNotRefillTheHole:
    def test_the_removed_date_is_not_handed_to_the_other_parent(self) -> None:
        """`_fund_swap`'s leftover hand-off must not undo the removal.

        In a swap window exactly one parent is on leave per date, so a date
        one parent is removed from would otherwise fall through as "unfunded
        leftover" and be offered to the partner — the day would visibly come
        back, just in the other parent's colour.
        """
        child = _child(birth_date=date(2025, 6, 1))
        parent_a = _parent(name="A")
        parent_b = _parent(name="B")
        wish = _wish(
            child_id=child.id,
            name="Sommar",
            start=_WINDOW_START,
            end=_WINDOW_END,
            weeks=1,
            first_year=2027,
            parent_mode="either",
        )
        # `parent_mode='either'` with two parents resolves to a swap window.
        alloc_input = _build_input(
            today=date(2027, 1, 1),
            horizon_end=date(2027, 12, 31),
            children=[child],
            parents=[parent_a, parent_b],
            pools={
                (parent_a.uuid, child.id): DayPool(200, 90, 60),
                (parent_b.uuid, child.id): DayPool(200, 90, 60),
            },
            vacation={
                (parent_a.uuid, 2027): VacationBudget(25, 0, 0),
                (parent_b.uuid, 2027): VacationBudget(25, 0, 0),
            },
            wishes=[wish],
            excluded_days=frozenset({(parent_a.uuid, child.id, _REMOVED)}),
        )
        proposal = Allocator().propose(alloc_input)

        assert _REMOVED not in {d.date for d in proposal.days}
        assert proposal.outcomes[0].shortfall_days == 0


class TestDeterminismIsPreserved:
    def test_same_input_same_output_with_exclusions(self) -> None:
        """§5 test #11 — the purity guarantee still holds with exclusions."""
        _seed_input, parent, child = _solo_scenario()
        excluded = frozenset({(parent.uuid, child.id, _REMOVED)})
        first_input, _p, _c = _solo_scenario(excluded=excluded, reuse=(child, parent))
        second_input, _p2, _c2 = _solo_scenario(excluded=excluded, reuse=(child, parent))

        first = Allocator().propose(first_input)
        second = Allocator().propose(second_input)

        assert [(d.date, d.day_type, d.reason) for d in first.days] == [
            (d.date, d.day_type, d.reason) for d in second.days
        ]