// @vitest-environment jsdom
//
// The card layout's pager clamps an out-of-range page DURING RENDER (E27 S2), which is the right
// shape — React discards that pass, so nothing is committed on a page that no longer exists — but
// it is also the shape that turns a non-convergent condition into "Too many re-renders" rather than
// a visual glitch. Neither the hook nor either of its two callers (ChannelDiscovery, Channels) had
// a test, so nothing held either half. This file holds both: the clamp happens, and it terminates.
import { describe, it, expect, vi, beforeEach } from "vitest";
import { renderHook, act } from "@testing-library/react";

vi.mock("react-i18next", async (importOriginal) => {
  const actual = await importOriginal<typeof import("react-i18next")>();
  return { ...actual, useTranslation: () => ({ t: (k: string) => k }) };
});

import { useCardPager } from "./useCardPager";

const rows = (n: number) => Array.from({ length: n }, (_, i) => i);
const KEY = "siftlode.test.cardSize";

beforeEach(() => {
  localStorage.clear();
  sessionStorage.setItem("siftlode.activeAccount", "1");
});

describe("useCardPager — an out-of-range page", () => {
  it("clamps to the last page that still exists when the list shrinks", () => {
    const { result, rerender } = renderHook(({ n }) => useCardPager(rows(n), KEY, true), {
      initialProps: { n: 30 },
    });
    act(() => result.current.pagerProps.onSizeChange(10));
    act(() => result.current.pagerProps.onPageChange(2));
    expect(result.current.pagerProps.page).toBe(2);
    expect(result.current.paged).toEqual([20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29]);

    rerender({ n: 5 }); // an unsubscribe, a refetch — page 2 no longer exists

    expect(result.current.pagerProps.page).toBe(0);
    expect(result.current.paged).toEqual([0, 1, 2, 3, 4]);
  });

  it("does not spring back to the stale page when the list grows again", () => {
    const { result, rerender } = renderHook(({ n }) => useCardPager(rows(n), KEY, true), {
      initialProps: { n: 30 },
    });
    act(() => result.current.pagerProps.onSizeChange(10));
    act(() => result.current.pagerProps.onPageChange(2));

    rerender({ n: 5 });
    rerender({ n: 30 });

    // The clamp was COMMITTED, not merely displayed — `safePage` alone would have let 2 come back.
    expect(result.current.pagerProps.page).toBe(0);
  });

  it("terminates on an empty list — the write falsifies its own condition", () => {
    const { result, rerender } = renderHook(({ n }) => useCardPager(rows(n), KEY, true), {
      initialProps: { n: 30 },
    });
    act(() => result.current.pagerProps.onSizeChange(10));
    act(() => result.current.pagerProps.onPageChange(2));

    // totalPages floors at 1, so the clamp target is 0 and the condition is false next pass. If it
    // were not, this line would throw "Too many re-renders" instead of returning.
    rerender({ n: 0 });

    expect(result.current.pagerProps.page).toBe(0);
    expect(result.current.paged).toEqual([]);
  });

  it("holds still in table mode, where DataTable does its own paging", () => {
    const { result, rerender } = renderHook(({ n, on }) => useCardPager(rows(n), KEY, on), {
      initialProps: { n: 30, on: false },
    });
    act(() => result.current.pagerProps.onSizeChange(10));
    act(() => result.current.pagerProps.onPageChange(2));

    rerender({ n: 5, on: false }); // the same shrink — but nothing is committed here
    rerender({ n: 30, on: false });

    // `safePage` still clamps for DISPLAY while the list is short; what must not happen is the
    // clamp being written, which would lose the page for real. Growing back proves it was not.
    expect(result.current.pagerProps.page).toBe(2);
    expect(result.current.paged).toEqual(rows(30)); // and the rows are never sliced in table mode
  });
});