Fix #3200: Disallow creation of superfluous implications.

Disallow transitive implications. If a -> b -> c already exists, don't
allow a -> c.

Caveat: if b -> c already exists, and we make a BUR for a -> b and a -> c,
the BUR validates even though a -> c is redundant. It only fails
when the BUR is approved.
This commit is contained in:
evazion
2017-07-04 17:02:17 -05:00
parent cda35494a4
commit 542c673221
3 changed files with 50 additions and 1 deletions

View File

@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ class TagImplication < ApplicationRecord
validates :forum_topic, presence: { message: "must exist" }, if: lambda { forum_topic_id.present? }
validates_uniqueness_of :antecedent_name, :scope => :consequent_name
validate :absence_of_circular_relation
validate :absence_of_transitive_relation
validate :antecedent_is_not_aliased
validate :consequent_is_not_aliased
validate :antecedent_and_consequent_are_different
@@ -137,6 +138,16 @@ class TagImplication < ApplicationRecord
end
end
# If we already have a -> b -> c, don't allow a -> c.
def absence_of_transitive_relation
# Find everything else the antecedent implies, not including the current implication.
implications = TagImplication.active.where("antecedent_name = ? and consequent_name != ?", antecedent_name, consequent_name)
implied_tags = implications.flat_map(&:descendant_names_array)
if implied_tags.include?(consequent_name)
self.errors[:base] << "#{antecedent_name} already implies #{consequent_name} through another implication"
end
end
def antecedent_is_not_aliased
# We don't want to implicate a -> b if a is already aliased to c
if TagAlias.active.exists?(["antecedent_name = ?", antecedent_name])

View File

@@ -62,6 +62,35 @@ class BulkUpdateRequestTest < ActiveSupport::TestCase
end
end
context "for an implication that is redundant with an existing implication" do
should "not validate" do
FactoryGirl.create(:tag_implication, :antecedent_name => "a", :consequent_name => "b")
FactoryGirl.create(:tag_implication, :antecedent_name => "b", :consequent_name => "c")
bur = FactoryGirl.build(:bulk_update_request, :script => "imply a -> c")
bur.save
assert_equal(["Error: a already implies c through another implication (create implication a -> c)"], bur.errors.full_messages)
end
end
context "for an implication that is redundant with another implication in the same BUR" do
setup do
FactoryGirl.create(:tag_implication, :antecedent_name => "b", :consequent_name => "c")
@bur = FactoryGirl.build(:bulk_update_request, :script => "imply a -> b\nimply a -> c")
@bur.save
end
should "not process" do
assert_no_difference("TagImplication.count") do
@bur.approve!(@admin)
end
end
should_eventually "not validate" do
assert_equal(["Error: a already implies c through another implication (create implication a -> c)"], @bur.errors.full_messages)
end
end
context "with an associated forum topic" do
setup do
@topic = FactoryGirl.create(:forum_topic, :title => "[bulk] hoge")

View File

@@ -66,12 +66,21 @@ class TagImplicationTest < ActiveSupport::TestCase
assert_equal("Tag implication can not create a circular relation with another tag implication", ti2.errors.full_messages.join(""))
end
should "not validate when a transitive relation is created" do
ti_ab = FactoryGirl.create(:tag_implication, :antecedent_name => "a", :consequent_name => "b")
ti_bc = FactoryGirl.create(:tag_implication, :antecedent_name => "b", :consequent_name => "c")
ti_ac = FactoryGirl.build(:tag_implication, :antecedent_name => "a", :consequent_name => "c")
ti_ac.save
assert_equal("a already implies c through another implication", ti_ac.errors.full_messages.join(""))
end
should "not allow for duplicates" do
ti1 = FactoryGirl.create(:tag_implication, :antecedent_name => "aaa", :consequent_name => "bbb")
ti2 = FactoryGirl.build(:tag_implication, :antecedent_name => "aaa", :consequent_name => "bbb")
ti2.save
assert(ti2.errors.any?, "Tag implication should not have validated.")
assert_equal("Antecedent name has already been taken", ti2.errors.full_messages.join(""))
assert_includes(ti2.errors.full_messages, "Antecedent name has already been taken")
end
should "not validate if its consequent is aliased to another tag" do