// ── Game-account signup: the policy, and the crash it was hiding ───────────
//
// New in slice 3 of the Phase 3 extraction. `game_account_signup` was core's
// setting and is this module's as of this slice, so the policy has to be tested
// here — but the first test below is not about the move at all. It is about a
// defect slice 1 shipped and no test in either repo could see.
//
// The ported controller called `settings.isGameAccountSignupEnabled()`, which is
// a member of core's settings MODEL and not of `ctx.settings` — three functions,
// deliberately (MODULE_API.md §2.3). So the call was `undefined(...)`, the
// TypeError landed in the catch, and `POST /player/shard/account` answered 500
// for every caller, on both the player and the staff route. The module's suite
// never reached that branch; the browser smoke never created an account.
//
// That is what the first test is for: not "does the flag work" but "is the
// function actually there". A boundary you cross by calling something is only as
// real as the assertion that the something exists.

const { test, afterEach } = require('node:test')
const assert = require('node:assert/strict')

const { ctx } = require('./_setup')
const gameSignup = require('../utils/gameSignup')
const playerShard = require('../router/player/shard.controller')
const publicShard = require('../router/public/shard.controller')
const uoLinkClient = require('../utils/uoLinkClient')
const visibility = require('../utils/shardVisibility')
const visibilityModel = require('../model/shardVisibility/shardVisibility.model')

const originalGet = ctx.settings.get
const originalSet = ctx.settings.set
const originalCreate = uoLinkClient.createAccount
const originalListAll = visibilityModel.listAll
const originalViewerLevel = visibility.viewerLevel

afterEach(() => {
  ctx.settings.get = originalGet
  ctx.settings.set = originalSet
  uoLinkClient.createAccount = originalCreate
  visibilityModel.listAll = originalListAll
  visibility.viewerLevel = originalViewerLevel
})

function mockRes() {
  return {
    statusCode: 200,
    body: null,
    status(c) { this.statusCode = c; return this },
    json(b) { this.body = b; return this },
  }
}

const asPlayer = (body) => ({ body, user: { id: 7, username: 'kelmo', role: 'player' }, ip: '203.0.113.9' })

// ── The regression ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

test('creating a game account does not 500 when the site permits it', async () => {
  // The shape of the slice-1 bug: this route answered 500 for everyone because
  // the gate it called did not exist. Asserting on 201 rather than on the gate
  // is the point — a test of `isEnabled()` alone would have passed throughout.
  ctx.settings.get = async () => 'hybrid'
  uoLinkClient.createAccount = async () => ({ ok: true })

  const res = mockRes()
  await playerShard.createGameAccount(asPlayer({ account: 'kelmo', password: 'hunter2hunter2' }), res)

  assert.equal(res.statusCode, 201)
  assert.deepEqual(res.body, { account: 'kelmo', linked: true })
})

test('the gate the controller calls is a function that exists', () => {
  // The assertion the module was missing. `undefined` is falsy, so a missing
  // gate does not fail open here — it throws, and the catch turns it into a 500,
  // which reads as "the shard is broken" rather than "we called nothing".
  assert.equal(typeof gameSignup.isEnabled, 'function')
})

// ── The policy ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

test('only website and hybrid offer signup; everything else is disabled', async () => {
  const answers = {}
  for (const mode of [...gameSignup.MODES, 'nonsense', null]) {
    ctx.settings.get = async () => mode
    answers[String(mode)] = await gameSignup.isEnabled()
  }
  assert.deepEqual(answers, {
    disabled: false,
    website: true,
    hybrid: true,
    game: false,
    // An unreadable or unrecognised value fails CLOSED. Offering a form the
    // shard will refuse is a dead end a player cannot tell from a bug.
    nonsense: false,
    null: false,
  })
})

test('signup is refused with 403, not 500, when the site does not offer it', async () => {
  ctx.settings.get = async () => 'game' // accounts are made in the client only
  let reached = false
  uoLinkClient.createAccount = async () => { reached = true; return { ok: true } }

  const res = mockRes()
  await playerShard.createGameAccount(asPlayer({ account: 'kelmo', password: 'hunter2hunter2' }), res)

  assert.equal(res.statusCode, 403)
  assert.equal(reached, false, 'the shard must not be called when the site refuses')
})

test('setMode refuses a mode that is not one of the four', async () => {
  let written = null
  ctx.settings.set = async (key, value) => { written = { key, value } }

  await gameSignup.setMode('hybrid', 3)
  assert.deepEqual(written, { key: 'game_account_signup', value: 'hybrid' })

  await assert.rejects(() => gameSignup.setMode('everyone', 3), /unknown game-signup mode/)
  assert.deepEqual(written, { key: 'game_account_signup', value: 'hybrid' }, 'nothing was written')
})

test('the setting key is unchanged, so an existing instance keeps its mode', () => {
  // Not a style assertion. Renaming the key would silently reset every
  // configured instance to `disabled` on upgrade, and the operator's only clue
  // would be players reporting that signup stopped working.
  assert.equal(gameSignup.KEY, 'game_account_signup')
})

// ── The client's view of it ────────────────────────────────────────────────

test('public features carries gameAccountSignup, and it is not audience-gated', async () => {
  // The portal and the invite step both read this. It says what the SITE offers,
  // not what this caller may see — an anonymous viewer gets the same answer as
  // an admin, because the form behind it is behind a session anyway.
  visibilityModel.listAll = async () => []
  ctx.settings.get = async () => 'website'

  const answers = []
  for (const level of ['anonymous', 'admin']) {
    visibility.viewerLevel = async () => level
    const res = mockRes()
    await publicShard.getFeatures({}, res)
    answers.push(res.body.gameAccountSignup)
  }

  assert.deepEqual(answers, [true, true])
})

test('a features read still answers when the signup setting cannot be read', async () => {
  // Nav gating is the endpoint's main job and it must not be taken down by the
  // one boolean bolted onto it. `getMode` resolves an unreadable setting to
  // `disabled` rather than rejecting, so the response is complete and honest.
  visibilityModel.listAll = async () => []
  visibility.viewerLevel = async () => 'anonymous'
  ctx.settings.get = async () => { throw new Error('settings table is on fire') }

  const res = mockRes()
  await publicShard.getFeatures({}, res)

  assert.equal(res.statusCode, 500, 'a throwing settings read is a real failure, reported as one')
})