microsoft / mwt-ds-explore-java Goto Github PK

It would be nice to have this artifact available on maven central. I could help with this if you would like.

This repository is currently missing a LICENSE file.

A license helps users understand how to use your project in a compliant manner. You can find the standard MIT license Microsoft uses at: https://github.com/microsoft/repo-templates/blob/main/shared/LICENSE.

If you would like to learn more about open source licenses, please visit the document at https://aka.ms/license (Microsoft-internal guidance).

I found two issues when trying to compile the project using maven. The first is that GSON is required in com.mwt.tests.BlackBox but is not in the pom.xml file. A second issue that is com.mwt.tests.BlackBox uses java 1.7 classes. To fix these, I would put the com.mwt.tests package in src/test/java and I would update the pom.xml to have the dependencies:

<dependencies>
...
    <dependency>
      <groupId>commons-io</groupId>
      <artifactId>commons-io</artifactId>
      <version>2.4</version>
      <scope>test</scope>
    </dependency>

    <dependency>
      <groupId>com.google.code.gson</groupId>
      <artifactId>gson</artifactId>
      <version>2.4</version>
      <scope>test</scope>
    </dependency>
...
</dependencies>

This way, GSON is not a runtime dependency of the library since it's only used in the test code.

Additionally, I'd change com.mwt.tests.BlackBox to import

1. org.apache.commons.io.IOUtils
2. java.io.File

Then I would remove the java.nio imports and I would change the first line in the try inside the main method to

String content = IOUtils.toString(new File(args[0]).toURI());

This would fix everything and put tests in the proper subdirectory according to maven convention. I'd be happy to submit a pull request if you'd like.

There are a lot of places where java.util.List iteration follows the pattern:

java.util.List<X> lst = ...
for (int i = 0; i < lst.size; i++) {
  doSomething( lst.get(i) );
}

In most or all situations, these can be replaced with for each-style iteration. Changing this isn't just for stylistic reasons. It can actually have implications on performance guarantees too. Specifically, there are places in the code base like in com/mwt/explorers/BootstrapExplorer.java where you see the following code:

public class BootstrapExplorer<T> implements Explorer<T>, ConsumePolicies<T> {
  private List<Policy<T>> policies;

  public DecisionTuple chooseAction(long saltedSeed, T context) {
    for (int currentBag = 0; currentBag < policies.size(); currentBag++) {
      actionFromBag = policies.get(currentBag).chooseAction(context);  // line 61
    }
  }
}

The problem is on line 61, actionFromBag = policies.get(currentBag).chooseAction(context). Since there's no random access guarantee at an API level for policies because it's a java.util.List, this loop has a worst case runtime of _O(_P ²) rather than the desired _O(_P) runtime.

By changing standard C-style for loops to for each-style loops, we can make tighten the runtime guarantees while not changing the MWT APIs.