/**
 * Shared logic and copy for the "last distance offered" figure.
 *
 * The primary and secondary admissions sections lay their metrics out
 * differently (a seamless tile grid vs. metric cards), so the markup is not
 * shared — but the words are. Every caveat below is doing a specific job, and
 * a figure that appeared on one template without them would be misleading in a
 * way the other template was not:
 *
 *   * The year, because a cut-off is the outcome of one particular admissions
 *     round and means nothing detached from it.
 *   * "not a fixed catchment", because that is the inference a parent will
 *     otherwise draw, and it is wrong — the distance moves every year.
 *   * The route count, because on a banded school the headline is the widest
 *     of several cut-offs and does not apply to every child.
 */

import type { SchoolAdmissionDistance } from '@/lib/types';
import { formatCutoffDistance, formatMiles, formatEntryYear } from '@/lib/utils';

export interface CutoffDisplay {
  /** Headline figure, e.g. "0.31 miles". */
  primary: string;
  /** Supporting conversion, e.g. "500 m". */
  secondary: string;
  /** Entry point the figure belongs to, e.g. "September 2025". */
  entryYear: string;
  /** Present only where several admission routes were collapsed into one figure. */
  routeNote: string | null;
}

/** What the cut-off measures, and what it does not. Identical on both templates. */
export const CUTOFF_NOTE =
  'The furthest home offered a place, after higher priorities such as siblings, ' +
  'faith and EHCP were applied. It is not a fixed catchment — it moves every year ' +
  'with the number of applications.';

/** Straight-line, because that is how councils measure it. */
export const CUTOFF_MEASUREMENT_NOTE = 'Measured in a straight line from the school.';

export function describeCutoff(
  distance: SchoolAdmissionDistance | null | undefined
): CutoffDisplay | null {
  if (!distance) return null;

  const figure = formatCutoffDistance(distance.distance_m);
  if (!figure) return null;

  const routes = distance.route_count ?? 1;

  return {
    primary: figure.primary,
    secondary: figure.secondary,
    entryYear: formatEntryYear(distance.year),
    routeNote:
      routes > 1
        ? `Furthest of ${routes} admission routes at this school — the one that ` +
          'applies to your child may have had a shorter cut-off.'
        : null,
  };
}

// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
// "Would we have got in?"
// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

/**
 * How close a home has to be to the cut-off before the comparison stops
 * meaning anything, in metres.
 *
 * postcodes.io returns the centroid of a postcode unit covering roughly fifteen
 * addresses, so the home point carries error of this order before anything else
 * is considered. Against a cut-off that is often only 500 m that is a fifth of
 * the whole distance. Inside this band the honest answer is that we cannot
 * tell, and saying "you would have been offered a place" would be inventing
 * precision the inputs do not have.
 */
export const CUTOFF_UNCERTAINTY_M = 100;

export type CutoffVerdict = 'inside' | 'outside' | 'too-close';

export interface CutoffCheckResult {
  /** Straight-line metres from the given postcode to the school. */
  distanceM: number;
  distanceLabel: string;
  verdict: CutoffVerdict;
  headline: string;
  /** Why we cannot call it, on the one verdict that needs explaining. Kept
   *  apart from the headline so it does not run at headline weight. */
  detail: string | null;
}

/**
 * Compare a home against the one cut-off we publish.
 *
 * Only the latest year is compared because only the latest year is served:
 * earlier years are held back as a paid feature and no longer leave the API.
 * A single year makes the verdict sharper to state and easier to qualify — one
 * distance, one year, one margin — but it also removes the reassurance a run of
 * years gave, so the year is named in the headline rather than left implied.
 */
export function compareToCutoff(
  distanceM: number,
  cutoffM: number,
  year: number,
): CutoffCheckResult {
  const margin = cutoffM - distanceM;
  const verdict: CutoffVerdict =
    Math.abs(margin) <= CUTOFF_UNCERTAINTY_M ? 'too-close' : margin > 0 ? 'inside' : 'outside';

  // Both sides through the same formatter, with no fallback that could reach
  // for a different unit: the sentence compares these two numbers directly, so
  // they have to be in the same one. formatCutoffDistance returns null for a
  // zero or negative figure, and its old "N m" fallback here was one of the
  // ways a metres reading used to appear next to a miles one.
  const label = formatMiles(distanceM);
  const cutoffLabel = formatMiles(cutoffM);

  // "the September 2026 cut-off of 0.17 miles" rather than "the 0.17 miles
  // cut-off for September 2026": the figure carries its own unit word, which
  // reads wrong used attributively.
  const cutoffPhrase = `the September ${year} cut-off of ${cutoffLabel}`;
  const headline =
    verdict === 'inside'
      ? `${label} away — inside ${cutoffPhrase}.`
      : verdict === 'outside'
        ? `${label} away — beyond ${cutoffPhrase}.`
        : `${label} away — too close to ${cutoffPhrase} to call.`;

  const detail =
    verdict === 'too-close'
      ? 'Your postcode is a centroid covering several addresses, so a margin '
        + `under ${CUTOFF_UNCERTAINTY_M} m is inside the measurement error.`
      : null;

  return { distanceM, distanceLabel: label, verdict, headline, detail };
}

/**
 * The limits of the figure, and of the check made against it.
 *
 * One caveat, rendered once at the end of the section. It was previously three
 * paragraphs — under the map, under the check, and a trailing "not a catchment"
 * line — which took ~180px between them, said walking-route twice, and made
 * the same point about priorities in two voices.
 *
 * Phrased to stand up whether or not the postcode check is on the page: it
 * opens on the figure rather than on "your result", because a school with no
 * coordinates renders the table with no check beneath it.
 *
 * Every claim is still here:
 *   * distance is the last criterion applied, not the first;
 *   * the figures and rings are straight-line, and not a boundary;
 *   * some authorities measure a walking route, always longer for the same home;
 *   * a past cut-off constrains next year's not at all.
 */
export const CUTOFF_CHECK_CAVEAT =
  'Distance is the last criterion applied. Places go first to children in care, '
  + 'EHCP places, siblings and — at faith schools — on faith criteria, so a home '
  + 'inside the distance can still miss out. Figures are straight-line distances '
  + 'and not a catchment boundary; some authorities measure a walking route '
  + "instead, which is always longer for the same home. Next year's cut-off "
  + "depends on next year's applicants — always check the school's own "
  + 'admissions policy.';

// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
// When there is no figure
// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

/** The slice of an admissions year this file needs. */
interface AdmissionsYearLike {
  year: number;
  oversubscribed?: boolean | null;
}

interface AbsenceInput {
  localAuthority?: string | null;
  admissionsPolicy?: string | null;
  admissionsHistory?: AdmissionsYearLike[];
}

/**
 * Why this school has no cut-off distance, in the most useful terms available.
 *
 * "No data" is the least informative thing we could say, and for two of these
 * cases it is also the most pessimistic reading of a fact that is either
 * neutral or good news. The order matters: a selective school's absence is
 * explained by how it admits, which outranks anything the publication record
 * says.
 */
export function describeCutoffAbsence({
  localAuthority,
  admissionsPolicy,
  admissionsHistory = [],
}: AbsenceInput): string {
  const policy = (admissionsPolicy ?? '').toLowerCase();
  if (policy.includes('selective')) {
    return 'Places at this school are ranked by the entrance test rather than by '
      + 'distance, so no cut-off distance applies.';
  }

  const known = admissionsHistory.filter((a) => a.oversubscribed != null);
  if (known.length >= 3 && known.every((a) => a.oversubscribed === false)) {
    return `First preferences have not exceeded places in any of the last ${known.length} `
      + 'years, so this school has not needed a distance cut-off.';
  }

  return (localAuthority
    ? `${localAuthority} has not published a cut-off distance for this school.`
    : 'No cut-off distance has been published for this school.')
    + ' Contact the admissions authority for its oversubscription criteria.';
}