import type { Combination } from './bookabilityScopes';
import { gapBlockers } from './bookabilityReasons';

// - WHICH BUCKET a combination belongs in, and therefore how the why-not panel FRAMES it.
//
// THE DEFECT THIS FIXES: the panel bucketed on `staffBookable`, which is the AUDIENCE axis ("who does
// this stop?"), to decide FRAMING ("deliberate, or broken?"). Those are two different questions, and card
// 113's own comment predicted the confusion. Until telehealth arrived every by-design blocker was also
// patient-only, so one field answered both and was accidentally right.
//
// The telehealth gates break the coincidence: `ORG_TELEHEALTH_DISABLED` and
// `SERVICE_NOT_TELEHEALTH_ELIGIBLE` are BY DESIGN and they stop EVERYONE - a practice with video off
// cannot take a video booking from the front desk either. So `staffBookable` goes false, and on the old
// bucketing the row landed in `gaps`: amber `#b45309`, with *"Change this under Organization
// Healthcare Services"* beside it, counted in the headline *"N things patients can't book"*.
// `bookabilityReasons.ts` says of exactly these codes: **"Never colour these amber, and never count them
// as problems in a rollup."** A practice manager was being told that "this service can't be done as a
// video visit" is a setup fault to go and fix.
//
// THE WRONG FIX, fenced by the card and worth repeating: do NOT add the telehealth codes to
// `PATIENT_ONLY`. That set answers the audience question, and deliberately made it an ALLOWLIST
// so an unclassified blocker fails CLOSED. Widening it would report a video booking as staff-bookable at
// a practice that does not offer video - the exact bug fixed.
//
// The framing axis already had a name: `gapBlockers()` - "blockers that represent something missing or
// broken". `UnbookableSaveDialog` has always used it correctly. This is the panel catching up, not a new
// concept.

export interface BookabilityBuckets {
    /** Patients can self-book. */
    bookable: Combination[];
    /** Something is missing or broken amber, fix guidance, counted as a problem. */
    gaps: Combination[];
    /** Deliberate configuration neutral, never amber, NEVER counted as a problem. */
    byDesign: Combination[];
}

/**
 * Is this combination unbookable *on purpose*?
 *
 * REQUIRES AT LEAST ONE BLOCKER, and that is a fail-safe rather than a formality. `gapBlockers([])` is
 * `[]`, so a combination that is somehow not bookable while reporting NO blockers would otherwise be
 * declared "deliberate" - the panel would quietly assure a practice that an unexplained failure is
 * working as intended. An unexplained non-bookable belongs in `gaps`, where someone looks at it.
 * Same direction of failure as allowlist: unclassified means "not yet blessed", never "fine".
 */
const isDeliberate = (c: Combination): boolean =>
    c.blockers.length > 0 && gapBlockers(c.blockers).length === 0;

/**
 * Split combinations into the three things an operator can act on differently.
 *
 * The buckets are DISJOINT and EXHAUSTIVE - every combination lands in exactly one, which is what lets
 * the panel render them as three sections without double-counting a row in the headline.
 */
export const bucketCombinations = (combinations: readonly Combination[]): BookabilityBuckets => ({
    bookable: combinations.filter((c) => c.bookable),
    gaps: combinations.filter((c) => !c.bookable && !isDeliberate(c)),
    byDesign: combinations.filter((c) => !c.bookable && isDeliberate(c)),
});