Fix unsorted legal actions. #209
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Whoops... good catch, thanks John! |
|
Is there a general test that could catch this? |
Yeah pretty sure we already have one-- Ed added it when we added the requirement for sorted actions. John is using .efg files generated from code that he has not been submitted yet, so my guess is it was in one of those. (But maybe we indeed don't have the test.) |
|
Yeah that's how I caught it. It just so happens that none of the current EFG files trigger the error. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The last update broke compatibility with some of my EFG files that used to work. The EFG file specification does not guarantee the action names will be sorted. And even if the action names are always sorted within a given node, they may not have been first encountered in that order, so the
action_idsthey map to may be unsorted. Consider first encountering the infoset with actions {"B" "C"}, followed by {"A" "B" "C"}. Theaction_idsare then B->0, C->1, A->2. So when callingLegalActions()on the second infoset, we get [2, 0, 1]. Sorting theaction_idsafter parsing all the actions within each node fixed the issue.