[JVM_IR] Fix stepping behavior for assignments to local variables.

compiler/testData/debug/stepping/assertion.kt

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-// IGNORE_BACKEND: JVM_IR
 // FILE: test.kt
+
 public val MASSERTIONS_ENABLED: Boolean = true
 
 public inline fun massert(value: Boolean, lazyMessage: () -> String) {
@@ -29,6 +29,12 @@ fun box(): String {
     return "OK"
 }
 
+// JVM_IR steps on line 15 both on the way in and on the way out
+// of the massert method. This is consistent with what would
+// happen if massert was not inline and we used force-step-into
+// to step through the $default method. JVM only hits line 15 on
+// the way in.
+
 // LINENUMBERS
 // test.kt:24 box
 // test.kt:15 box
@@ -37,6 +43,9 @@ fun box(): String {
 // test.kt:16 box
 // test.kt:17 box
 // test.kt:21 box
+// LINENUMBERS JVM_IR
+// test.kt:15 box
+// LINENUMBERS
 // test.kt:25 box
 // test.kt:6 box
 // test.kt:3 getMASSERTIONS_ENABLED

compiler/testData/debug/stepping/compileTimeConstant.kt

@@ -5,9 +5,6 @@ fun box() {
             42
 }
 
-// IGNORE_BACKEND: JVM_IR
-// The JVM_IR backend does not hit line 4. That should be fixed.
-
 // LINENUMBERS
 // test.kt:5 box
 // test.kt:4 box

compiler/testData/debug/stepping/functionCallWithDefault.kt

@@ -11,11 +11,10 @@ fun foo(i: Int = 1) {
 inline fun bar(i: Int = 1) {
 }
 
-// TODO: The JVM_IR backend has line number 11 for the inlined
+// The JVM_IR backend has line number 11 for the inlined
 // default argument handling both before and after the actual
 // body of bar. That is consistent with what happens with the
-// $default method in the non-inlined case, but it is not what
-// happens with the JVM backend.
+// $default method in the non-inlined case.
 
 // FORCE_STEP_INTO
 // LINENUMBERS

compiler/testData/debug/stepping/inlineCallableReference.kt

@@ -4,6 +4,11 @@ fun box() {
     f {
         x = true
     }
+    var y =
+        true
+    f {
+        y = false
+    }
 }
 
 inline fun f(block: () -> Unit) {
@@ -13,8 +18,16 @@ inline fun f(block: () -> Unit) {
 // LINENUMBERS
 // test.kt:3 box
 // test.kt:4 box
-// test.kt:10 box
+// test.kt:15 box
 // test.kt:5 box
 // test.kt:6 box
-// test.kt:11 box
+// test.kt:16 box
 // test.kt:7 box
+// test.kt:8 box
+// test.kt:7 box
+// test.kt:9 box
+// test.kt:15 box
+// test.kt:10 box
+// test.kt:11 box
+// test.kt:16 box
+// test.kt:12 box

compiler/testData/debug/stepping/simpleDefaultArgWithInline.kt

@@ -1,15 +1,32 @@
-// IGNORE_BACKEND: JVM_IR
 // FILE: test.kt
+
 inline fun ifoo(ok: String = "OK"): String {
     return ok
 }
 
-fun box(): String {
-    return ifoo()
+fun ifoo2(ok: String = "OK"): String {
+    return ok
 }
-// TODO: IR Backend behaves like simpleDefaultArg: 8,3,4, _3_ ,8
+
+fun box(): String {
+    ifoo()
+    return ifoo2()
+}
+
+// JVM_IR backend has the same stepping behavior as
+// the non-inlined case when using force step into to step
+// through $default method. JVM does not.
+
+// FORCE_STEP_INTO
 // LINENUMBERS
-// test.kt:8 box
+// test.kt:12 box
 // test.kt:3 box
 // test.kt:4 box
-// test.kt:8 box
+// LINENUMBERS JVM_IR
+// test.kt:3 box
+// LINENUMBERS
+// test.kt:13 box
+// test.kt:7 ifoo2$default (synthetic)
+// test.kt:8 ifoo2
+// test.kt:7 ifoo2$default (synthetic)
+// test.kt:13 box

compiler/testData/debug/stepping/variablesWithoutInitializer.kt

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+// FILE: test.kt
+
+fun box() {
+    var x: String
+    var y: Int
+    var z: Boolean
+    z = false
+    y = 42
+    if (!z) {
+        x = y.toString()
+    }
+}
+
+// The JVM IR backend does not generate line number information for the
+// declaration of local variables without initializer. Stepping through
+// those does not seem useful. This is consistent with javac behavior
+// as well. The JVM backend does generate these line numbers.
+
+// LINENUMBERS
+// LINENUMBERS JVM
+// test.kt:4 box
+// test.kt:5 box
+// test.kt:6 box
+// LINENUMBERS
+// test.kt:7 box
+// test.kt:8 box
+// test.kt:9 box
+// test.kt:10 box
+// test.kt:12 box