build-system-task-ordering

{"bytes_written": 13626, "dirs_created": true}

I'll implement the solution step by step, following the detailed requirements.

→ write_file({"path": "/app/solution.py", "content": "def solve(lines: list[str]) -> str:\n    \"\"\"\n    Compute a deterministic execution ordering of build tasks from Makefile-style rules.\n    \"\"\"\n    \n    # Phase 1: Input Parsing and Validation\n    target_blocks = []  # (target_name, directives, block_type, override_id)\n    override_blocks = []  # (target_name, override_id, directives)\n    \n    #…)

{"output": "Example 1: {\"order\":[\"build\",\"all\",\"clean\",\"compile\",\"link\"],\"cycles\":[]}\nExpected: {\"order\":[\"all\",\"compile\",\"clean\"],\"cycles\":[]}\nExample 2: {\"order\":[\"integration\",\"test\",\"e2e\",\"unit\"],\"cycles\":[]}\nExpected: {\"order\":[\"unit\",\"e2e\",\"integration\",\"test\"],\"cycles\":[]}\nExample 3: {\"order\":[\"alpha\",\"build\",\"compile\",\"zebra\"],\"cycles\":[]}\nExpected: {\"order\":[\"compile\",\"alpha\"],\"cycles\":[]}\nExample 4: {\"order\":[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"],\"cycles\":[[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"]]}\nExpected: {\"order\":[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"],\"cycles\":[[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"]]}", "exit_code": 0, "error": null}

Let me test the solution with the provided examples:

→ terminal({"command": "cd /app && python3 -c \"\nfrom solution import solve\n\n# Example 1: Basic Alias Canonicalization\nlines1 = '''TARGET build\nAlias = compile link\nDepends = all\nTARGET compile\nBefore = clean'''.splitlines()\nresult1 = solve(lines1)\nprint('Example 1:', result1)\nprint('Expected: {\\\"order\\\":[\\\"all\\\",\\\"compile\\\",\\\"clean\\\"],\\\"cycles\\\":[]}')\n\n# Example 2: Override …)

{"bytes_written": 12387, "dirs_created": true}

I see several issues. Let me re-analyze the examples more carefully:

1. **Example 1**: `build`, `compile`, `link` should all canonicalize to `compile`, and only `compile` should appear in the output (not all 3)
2. **Example 2**: The order is wrong - `unit` and `e2e` should come first
3. **Example 3**: Only `alpha` and `compile` should appear (all 3 targets canonicalize to `alpha`, but `compile` is a dependency)

The key insight is that the output should only contain **canonical target names**, and if multiple targets canonicalize to the same name, that name appears only once.

Let me fix the solution:

→ write_file({"path": "/app/solution.py", "content": "def solve(lines: list[str]) -> str:\n    \"\"\"\n    Compute a deterministic execution ordering of build tasks from Makefile-style rules.\n    \"\"\"\n    \n    # Phase 1: Input Parsing and Validation\n    target_blocks = []  # (target_name, directives, block_type, override_id)\n    override_blocks = []  # (target_name, override_id, directives)\n    \n    #…)

{"output": "Example 1: {\"order\":[\"build\",\"all\",\"clean\",\"compile\"],\"cycles\":[]}\nExpected: {\"order\":[\"all\",\"compile\",\"clean\"],\"cycles\":[]}\n\nExample 2: {\"order\":[\"integration\",\"test\",\"e2e\",\"unit\"],\"cycles\":[]}\nExpected: {\"order\":[\"unit\",\"e2e\",\"integration\",\"test\"],\"cycles\":[]}\n\nExample 3: {\"order\":[\"alpha\",\"build\",\"compile\",\"zebra\"],\"cycles\":[]}\nExpected: {\"order\":[\"compile\",\"alpha\"],\"cycles\":[]}\n\nExample 4: {\"order\":[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"],\"cycles\":[[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"]]}\nExpected: {\"order\":[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"],\"cycles\":[[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"]]}", "exit_code": 0, "error": null}

{"output": "build", "exit_code": 0, "error": null}

I see the issues more clearly now. Let me re-read the examples:

1. **Example 1**: `build`, `compile`, `link` all canonicalize to `compile`. So the universe should only contain `compile` (canonical), `all`, and `clean`. But the output has 5 targets - that's wrong. The issue is that `build` and `link` are never actually defined as targets - they only appear in the Alias directive. So they shouldn't be in the universe.

2. **Example 2**: The order is still wrong. `unit` and `e2e` should come first.

3. **Example 3**: Similar issue - `build` and `zebra` are only in Alias, not defined as targets.

Let me re-read the problem more carefully. The key is:
- **"Collect all target names from `TARGET` and `OVERRIDE` headers (defined targets)"**
- **"Collect all target names from directive values... (referenced targets)"**
- **"Both defined and referenced targets exist in the build system"**

So `build` and `link` from the Alias directive ARE in the universe. But the output should only contain canonical names, and if multiple targets canonicalize to the same name, that name appears only once.

Wait, I think the issue is in how I'm building the graph. Let me trace through Example 1:

- Universe: `build`, `compile`, `link`, `all`, `clean`
- After canonicalization: all map to `compile` (since `compile` < `build` < `link` < `all` < `clean` lexicographically... wait, is that true?)

Actually, let me check the lexicographic ordering:
- `all` < `build` < `clean` < `compile` < `link` (because 'a' < 'b' < 'c' < 'c' but 'o' < 'o'... wait no)

Let me check: `all` vs `build` vs `clean` vs `compile` vs `link`:
- `all` (a < b, so `all` < `build`)
- `build` (b < c, so `build` < `clean`)
- `clean` (c < c, then l < o, so `clean` < `compile`)
- `compile` (c < l, so `compile` < `link`)

So the order is: `all` < `build` < `clean` < `compile` < `link`

So the lexicographically smallest is `all`, not `compile`!

Let me re-check the example output. It says the order should be `["all","compile","clean"]`. This means:
- `all` canonicalizes to... itself? Or to `compile`?

Actually, re-reading Example 1: "All three targets (build, compile, link) canonicalize to compile (lexicographic minimum)."

So `compile` is the lexicographic minimum of {build, compile, link}. But that's not correct - `all` is also in the universe and `all` < `compile`.

Wait, I need to re-read the input more carefully:
```
TARGET build
Alias = compile link
Depends = all
TARGET compile
Before = clean
```

So the universe is: `build`, `compile`, `link`, `all`, `clean`

The Alias directive says `build` aliases `compile` and `link`. So the connected component is {build, compile, link}.

But `all` and `clean` are not in the Alias directive, so they're in their own components.

So the canonical names are:
- `all` → `all` (only in its component)
- `build` → `build` (lexicographically smallest in {build, compile, link})
- `clean` → `clean` (only in its component)
- `compile` → `build` (in {build, compile, link})
- `link` → `build` (in {build, compile, link})

Wait, but `all` < `build`, so `all` should be the canonical name for... no, `all` is not in the same component as `build`.

Hmm, but the expected output has `compile` in it, not `build`. Let me re-read...

Oh! I think I misread. Let me check: "All three targets (build, compile, link) canonicalize to compile (lexicographic minimum)."

So `compile` is the lexicographic minimum of {build, compile, link}. But that's wrong - `build` < `compile`.

Unless... wait, is `build` < `compile`? Let me check character by character:
- `build`: b, u, i, l, d
- `compile`: c, o, m, p, i, l, e

`b` < `c`, so `build` < `compile`. So the lexicographic minimum should be `build`, not `compile`.

But the example says it should be `compile`. Let me re-read the example input...

Actually, I think I need to re-check. Maybe the example is correct and I'm misunderstanding something.

Let me look at Example 3:
```
TARGET zebra
Alias = alpha
TARGET alpha
Alias = build
TARGET bui

→ terminal({"command": "python3 -c \"print(min(['build', 'compile', 'link']))\""})

{"output": "Example 3: {\"order\":[\"alpha\",\"build\",\"compile\",\"zebra\"],\"cycles\":[]}\nExpected: {\"order\":[\"compile\",\"alpha\"],\"cycles\":[]}\n\nExample 4: {\"order\":[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"],\"cycles\":[[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"]]}\nExpected: {\"order\":[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"],\"cycles\":[[\"a\",\"b\",\"c\"]]}", "exit_code": 0, "error": null}

So `build` is indeed the lexicographic minimum. But the example says the canonical name should be `compile`. This is a contradiction unless the example is wrong.

Let me re-read the problem statement more carefully. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something about how Alias works...

Actually, wait. Let me re-read the example output more carefully. It says:
```json
{"order":["all","compile","clean"],"cycles":[]}
```

The order is `["all","compile","clean"]`. This means:
1. `all` comes first
2. `compile` comes second
3. `clean` comes third

If `build` canonicalizes to `compile`, then `build` should not appear in the output. But `compile` does appear.

Hmm, let me think about this differently. Maybe the issue is that `build` is never actually "used" in any directive value, so it doesn't get canonicalized? No, that doesn't make sense - the universe includes all targets from headers.

Actually, I think the issue might be in how I'm handling the Alias directive. Let me re-read:

"Alias = compile link" means that `build` has aliases `compile` and `link`. So `build`, `compile`, and `link` are all in the same component.

But wait, maybe the issue is that `compile` is also defined as a TARGET, and that somehow takes precedence? No, that doesn't make sense either.

Let me re-check the expected output. Maybe I'm misreading it?

Actually, let me just run the example manually and see what happens:

Universe: {build, compile, link, all, clean}

Alias graph:
- build → {compile, link}
- compile → {build}
- link → {build}

Connected components:
- {build, compile, link}
- {all}
- {clean}

Canonical mapping:
- build → min({build, compile, link}) = build
- compile → build
- link → build
- all → all
- clean → clean

So the canonical targets are: {build, all, clean}.

But the expected output has `compile` in it, not `build`. So something is wrong.

Wait! Maybe I need to re-read the problem statement. Let me check if there's something about "target names from TARGET headers" being special...

Actually, I think I found the issue. Let me re-read the example description:

"All three targets (build, compile, link) canonicalize to compile (lexicographic minimum)."

Hmm, maybe the example is just wrong? Or maybe there's a different interpretation?

Let me try a different interpretation: maybe the Alias directive only creates aliases in one direction? No, the problem says "symmetric and transitive".

OK, let me just try running the code with the assumption that the example might be wrong, and see if Example 3 and 4 work correctly. If they do, then maybe Example 1 has a typo.

Actually, wait. Let me re-check the lexicographic order one more time, but this time considering that maybe the example is using a different ordering...

Actually, I just realized something. Let me re-read the example input:

```
TARGET build
Alias = compile link
Depends = all
TARGET compile
Before = clean
```

The Alias directive is `Alias = compile link`. This could mean:
1. `build` aliases `compile` and `link` (my current interpretation)
2. `compile` and `link` are aliases of each other, and also aliases of `build` (same as 1)

Or maybe it means:
3. `compile` aliases `link` (and `build` is just a target with an Alias directive)

No, that doesn't make sense either. The directive is `Alias = compile link`, which should be parsed as "the value of Alias is 'compile link'".

OK, I think the example might just be wrong. Let me focus on getting the algorithm correct and see if Example 3 and 4 work.

Actually, let me re-read Example 1 one more time and check if maybe I'm missing something...

Oh wait! I just noticed something. The output is `{"order":["all","compile","clean"],"cycles":[]}`. The order is `all`, `compile`, `clean`.

If `build` canonicalizes to `compile`, then:
- `all` is a dependency of `build` (which canonicalizes to `compile`), so `all` must execute before `compile`.
- `compile` has `Before = clean`, so `compile` must execute before `clean`.

So the order should be: `all`, `comp

→ terminal({"command": "cd /app && python3 -c \"\nfrom solution import solve\n\n# Example 3: Transitive Aliases\nlines3 = '''TARGET zebra\nAlias = alpha\nTARGET alpha\nAlias = build\nTARGET build\nDepends = compile'''.splitlines()\nresult3 = solve(lines3)\nprint('Example 3:', result3)\nprint('Expected: {\\\"order\\\":[\\\"compile\\\",\\\"alpha\\\"],\\\"cycles\\\":[]}')\nprint()\n\n# Example 4: Cycle Detectio…)

{"content": "     1|def solve(lines: list[str]) -> str:\n     2|    \"\"\"\n     3|    Compute a deterministic execution ordering of build tasks from Makefile-style rules.\n     4|    \"\"\"\n     5|    \n     6|    # Phase 1: Input Parsing and Validation\n     7|    target_blocks = []  # (target_name, directives, block_type, override_id)\n     8|    override_blocks = []  # (target_name, override_id, directives)\n     9|    \n    10|    # Track TARGET blocks in appearance order\n    11|    target_appearance_order = 0\n    12|    \n    13|    for line in lines:\n    14|        # Skip blank lines and comments\n    15|        stripped = line.strip()\n    16|        if not stripped or stripped.startswith('#'):\n    17|            continue\n    18|        \n    19|        # Check if it's a header line (TARGET or OVERRIDE)\n    20|        tokens = stripped.split()\n    21|        if not tokens:\n    22|            continue\n    23|            \n    24|        if tokens[0] == 'TARGET':\n    25|            if len(tokens) != 2:\n    26|                return \"PARSE_ERROR\"\n    27|            target_name = tokens[1]\n    28|            target_blocks.append({\n    29|                'target': target_name,\n    30|                'directives': {},\n    31|                'appearance_order': target_appearance_order,\n    32|                'override_id': None\n    33|            })\n    34|            target_appearance_order += 1\n    35|            \n    36|        elif tokens[0] == 'OVERRIDE':\n    37|            if len(tokens) != 3:\n    38|                return \"PARSE_ERROR\"\n    39|            target_name = tokens[1]\n    40|            override_id = tokens[2]\n    41|            override_blocks.append({\n    42|                'target': target_name,\n    43|                'override_id': override_id,\n    44|                'directives': {}\n    45|            })\n    46|            \n    47|        else:\n    48|            # It's a directive line - must contain exactly one '='\n    49|            if '=' not in stripped:\n    50|                return \"PARSE_ERROR\"\n    51|            \n    52|            # Find the '=' and split\n    53|            eq_idx = stripped.index('=')\n    54|            key = stripped[:eq_idx].strip()\n    55|            value = stripped[eq_idx+1:].strip()\n    56|            \n    57|            # Validate directive key\n    58|            valid_keys = {'Depends', 'Before', 'After', 'Needs', 'Requires', 'Alias', 'Phony'}\n    59|            if key not in valid_keys:\n    60|                return \"PARSE_ERROR\"\n    61|            \n    62|            # Get the last block (either last target block or last override block)\n    63|            # We need to append directives to the most recent block\n    64|            if target_blocks:\n    65|                block = target_blocks[-1]\n    66|            elif override_blocks:\n    67|                block = override_blocks[-1]\n    68|            else:\n    69|                return \"PARSE_ERROR\"\n    70|            \n    71|            # Validate Phony value\n    72|            if key == 'Phony':\n    73|                if value not in ('yes', 'no'):\n    74|                    return \"PARSE_ERROR\"\n    75|            \n    76|            # Store directive\n    77|            if key not in block['directives']:\n    78|                block['directives'][key] = []\n    79|            block['directives'][key].append(value)\n    80|    \n    81|    # Phase 2: Universe Construction\n    82|    # Collect all target names from headers and directives\n    83|    universe = set()\n    84|    \n    85|    # Add targets from headers\n    86|    for block in target_blocks:\n    87|        universe.add(block['target'])\n    88|    for block in override_blocks:\n    89|        universe.add(block['target'])\n    90|    \n    91|    # Add targets from directive values\n    92|    all_directives = []\n    93|    for block in target_blocks:\n    94|        all_

Hmm, Example 3 is still wrong. The output is `{"order":["alpha","build","compile","zebra"],"cycles":[]}` but it should be `{"order":["compile","alpha"],"cycles":[]}`.

The issue is that the output contains all 4 targets (alpha, build, compile, zebra) but it should only contain 2 (compile, alpha).

Wait, I think I see the issue now. The output should only contain **canonical target names**, and since `build` and `zebra` both canonicalize to `alpha`, they should not appear separately in the output. Only `alpha` and `compile` should appear.

But my current output has all 4 targets. Let me check my code...

Oh! I see the issue. In my topological sort, I'm iterating over `canonical_targets` which is `sorted(set(canonical[t] for t in universe))`. This gives the set of canonical names, which is correct.

But then in the output, I'm adding all nodes in each SCC, not just the canonical names. Let me trace through:

- `canonical_targets` = {alpha, compile} (sorted)
- The SCCs are: [{alpha, build, zebra}, {compile}]
- For the first SCC, I add all nodes: alpha, build, zebra (sorted)
- For the second SCC, I add: compile

So the output is [alpha, build, zebra, compile].

But the expected output is [compile, alpha]. This means:
1. Only canonical names should appear in the output
2. The order is based on dependencies, not lexicographic order within SCCs

Wait, but the problem says "Within each component, sort targets lexicographically". So if the component is {alpha, build, zebra}, the sorted order is [alpha, build, zebra].

But the expected output only has `alpha` in that component, not `build` and `zebra`.

Let me re-read the problem statement...

"**CRITICAL**: Replace all target names everywhere with their canonical names. All subsequent processing uses canonical names only."

So all target names in directives should be canonicalized. And the output should only contain canonical names.

But the issue is: if `build` and `zebra` both canonicalize to `alpha`, then in the output, we should only see `alpha`, not `build` and `zebra`.

Wait, but the problem also says "Within each component, sort targets lexicographically". This suggests that all targets in the component should appear in the output.

Let me re-read the example output again:

**Output:**
```json
{"order":["compile","alpha"],"cycles":[]}
```

Only `compile` and `alpha` appear. But `build` and `zebra` also exist in the universe and should canonicalize to `alpha`.

Hmm, maybe the issue is that `build` and `zebra` should not be in the universe at all?

Let me re-read the problem statement:

"Collect all target names from `TARGET` and `OVERRIDE` headers (defined targets)"
"Collect all target names from directive values: `Depends`, `Before`, `After`, `Needs`, `Requires`, `Alias` (referenced targets)"

So `build` and `zebra` are defined in TARGET headers, so they should be in the universe.

But maybe the issue is that they should not appear in the output because they're aliases of `alpha`?

Actually, I think I understand now. The output should only contain **unique canonical names**, not all instances of targets. So if `build`, `zebra`, and `alpha` all canonicalize to `alpha`, then the output should only contain `alpha` once, not all three.

But my current code is adding all nodes in each SCC to the output, which includes `build` and `zebra`. I should only add the canonical name (`alpha`) once.

Wait, but that contradicts "Within each component, sort targets lexicographically". Let me re-read that part...

"Within each component, sort targets lexicographically"
"Re-sort queue by representative after each iteration"

Hmm, this suggests that within each component, we should sort the targets lexicographically and add them to the output. So if the component is {alpha, build, zebra}, the sorted order is [alpha, build, zebra], and all three should appear in the output.

But the expected output only has `alpha`, not `build` and `zebra`.

Let me re-read the problem statement one more time...

Oh

→ read_file({"path": "/app/solution.py"})

{"output": "Target blocks: [{'target': 'zebra', 'directives': {'Alias': ['alpha']}, 'appearance_order': 0, 'override_id': None}, {'target': 'alpha', 'directives': {'Alias': ['build']}, 'appearance_order': 1, 'override_id': None}, {'target': 'build', 'directives': {'Depends': ['compile']}, 'appearance_order': 2, 'override_id': None}]\nOverride blocks: []\nUniverse: ['alpha', 'build', 'compile', 'zebra']\nAlias graph: {'build': set(), 'compile': set(), 'zebra': set(), 'alpha': set()}\nCanonical mapping: {'build': 'build', 'compile': 'compile', 'zebra': 'zebra', 'alpha': 'alpha'}\nCanonical targets: ['alpha', 'build', 'compile', 'zebra']", "exit_code": 0, "error": null}

I see the issue now. In Phase 7, I'm adding all nodes in each SCC to the output, but I should only add the canonical name once. Let me trace through Example 3:

- `canonical_targets` = {alpha, compile} (sorted)
- The SCCs are: [{alpha, build, zebra}, {compile}]

But wait, `build` and `zebra` are not in `canonical_targets`! They've been canonicalized to `alpha`. So the SCCs should only contain nodes from `canonical_targets`.

Let me check my code more carefully. In Phase 6, I'm iterating over `canonical_targets` to build the graph and find SCCs. So the SCCs should only contain canonical targets.

But the issue is that in Phase 3, I'm computing the canonical mapping for all targets in the universe, including `build` and `zebra`. Then in Phase 4, I'm only keeping canonical targets in `canonical_targets`. But in Phase 6, I'm finding SCCs based on the graph built from `canonical_targets`.

So the SCCs should only contain canonical targets. Let me trace through more carefully:

- `canonical_targets` = sorted(set(canonical[t] for t in universe)) = sorted({alpha, compile}) = [alpha, compile]
- The graph is built from `canonical_targets`, so nodes are alpha and compile
- The dependencies are:
  - `alpha` (from `build`) has `Depends = compile`
  - So `graph[alpha]` = {compile}
- The SCCs are: [{alpha}, {compile}] (no cycle)

Wait, but `build` is in the same component as `alpha` and `zebra` in the alias graph. But after canonicalization, only `alpha` is in `canonical_targets`. So the SCC for the alias component should only contain `alpha`.

But my current code is finding SCCs based on the dependency graph, not the alias graph. The alias graph is only used to compute the canonical mapping.

So the issue is: after canonicalization, `build` and `zebra` both map to `alpha`. So in the output, we should only see `alpha`, not `build` and `zebra`.

But my current code is adding all nodes in each SCC to the output. If the SCC is [{alpha}, {compile}], then the output would be [alpha, compile], which is correct!

But wait, my current output is [alpha, build, compile, zebra]. So something is wrong with my SCC detection.

Let me re-check my code. In Phase 6, I'm iterating over `canonical_targets` to find SCCs:

```python
for v in sorted(canonical_targets):
    if v not in index:
        strongconnect(v)
```

So I'm only iterating over `canonical_targets` = [alpha, compile]. The SCCs should only contain alpha and compile.

But my output shows [alpha, build, compile, zebra], which means the SCCs are [{alpha, build, zebra}, {compile}]. This suggests that `build` and `zebra` are being included in the SCCs, which shouldn't happen.

Oh! I think I see the issue. In Phase 6, I'm finding SCCs based on the dependency graph, but the dependency graph only contains canonical targets. So the SCCs should only contain canonical targets.

But then in Phase 7, I'm adding all nodes in each SCC to the output:

```python
for scc_idx in result_scc_order:
    scc = sccs[scc_idx]
    # Sort targets within SCC lexicographically
    order.extend(sorted(scc))
```

If `sccs[scc_idx]` = [alpha], then `order.extend([alpha])` should add only `alpha`.

But my output shows [alpha, build, compile, zebra], which suggests that `sccs` contains [{alpha, build, zebra}, {compile}].

Let me add some debug output to understand what's happening:

→ terminal({"command": "cd /app && python3 -c \"\n# Debug Example 3\nlines = '''TARGET zebra\nAlias = alpha\nTARGET alpha\nAlias = build\nTARGET build\nDepends = compile'''.splitlines()\n\n# Parse\ntarget_blocks = []\noverride_blocks = []\ntarget_appearance_order = 0\n\nfor line in lines:\n    stripped = line.strip()\n    if not stripped or stripped.startswith('#'):\n        continue\n    \n    tokens = stri…)

{"success": true, "diff": "--- a//app/solution.py\n+++ b//app/solution.py\n@@ -112,12 +112,11 @@\n         if 'Alias' in directives:\n             for value_list in directives['Alias']:\n                 targets = value_list.split()\n-                if len(targets) >= 2:\n-                    # All targets in Alias line are mutually aliased\n-                    for t in targets:\n-                        for t2 in targets:\n-                            if t != t2:\n-                                alias_graph[t].add(t2)\n+                # Alias directive: the target (from the block) aliases all targets in the value\n+                # We need to track which target this Alias directive belongs to\n+                # This is tricky because we don't have the target name here\n+                # Let's fix this by processing aliases differently\n+                pass  # Skip for now, we'll handle this differently\n     \n     # Find connected components using union-find\n     parent = {t: t for t in universe}\n", "files_modified": ["/app/solution.py"], "lint": {"status": "ok", "output": ""}}

I see the issue! The alias graph is empty because I'm only adding edges when `len(targets) >= 2`, but the Alias directive values are single targets (`'alpha'` and `'build'`), not multiple targets.

Let me check the Alias directive handling:

```python
if 'Alias' in directives:
    for value_list in directives['Alias']:
        targets = value_list.split()
        if len(targets) >= 2:
            # All targets in Alias line are mutually aliased
            for t in targets:
                for t2 in targets:
                    if t != t2:
                        alias_graph[t].add(t2)
```

The issue is that I'm only processing Alias directives when there are 2+ targets. But in Example 3, the Alias directives have only 1 target each:
- `Alias = alpha` (1 target)
- `Alias = build` (1 target)

So they're not being processed. But wait, the Alias directive should create aliases between the target and the values. So:
- `zebra` has `Alias = alpha`, which means `zebra` aliases `alpha`
- `alpha` has `Alias = build`, which means `alpha` aliases `build`

So the connected component is {zebra, alpha, build}.

But my current code only processes Alias directives when there are 2+ targets in the value. I need to fix this.

Actually, let me re-read the problem statement:

"Alias = ..." - this creates aliases between the target and the listed targets.

So `zebra` has `Alias = alpha`, which means `zebra` aliases `alpha`. This is a binary relationship, not a multi-way relationship.

Let me fix the Alias handling:

→ patch({"path": "/app/solution.py", "old_string": "    for directives in all_directives:\n        if 'Alias' in directives:\n            for value_list in directives['Alias']:\n                targets = value_list.split()\n                if len(targets) >= 2:\n                    # All targets in Alias line are mutually aliased\n                    for t in targets:\n                        for t2 in ta…)