When implementing non-trivial algorithms (graph ordering, batching under constraints, multi-pass transformations), apply four requirements:
1) Guarantee termination with explicit guards/invariants
2) Respect real constraints with dynamic computation
MAX_TOKENS_PER_REQUEST), batch using dynamic per-item measurements (e.g., token counts), not fixed-size assumptions.3) Keep behavior deterministic across passes
4) Separate algorithm concerns into a dedicated, testable unit
Resolver/Planner with small methods and a clean public interface (e.g., resolve(middleware)).Example (token-aware batching with progress and guaranteed exit):
# Precondition: token_counts and tokens are aligned
batched = []
i = 0
while i < len(tokens):
batch_end = i + 1 # progress guarantee
batch_token_count = token_counts[i]
for j in range(i + 1, min(i + _chunk_size, len(tokens))):
if batch_token_count + token_counts[j] > MAX_TOKENS_PER_REQUEST:
break
batch_token_count += token_counts[j]
batch_end = j + 1
# API call uses tokens[i:batch_end]
response = client.create(input=tokens[i:batch_end], **client_kwargs)
batched.append(response)
i = batch_end
Example (deterministic Mermaid node label encoding):
def to_safe_ascii_id(label: str) -> str:
out = []
for ch in label:
if ch.isascii() and (ch.isalnum()):
out.append(ch.lower())
else:
out.append('n' + format(ord(ch), 'x'))
slug = ''.join(out)
return slug if slug[0].isalpha() else 'n' + slug
Adopting these rules reduces correctness regressions (limits/termination), avoids subtle identity mismatches in graph-like structures, and makes algorithmic code easier to reason about and test.
Enter the URL of a public GitHub repository