This commit changes the behavior of KT-59138 effectively declining it in 2.0.
However, we plan to implement KT-59138 behavior under a feature
flag in 2.0 (see KT-66447), and switch this feature on version 2.x.
Also, this commit implements the LC resolution about postponing
KT-57014 change. We don't have KT-57014 described behavior in 2.0 anymore.
However, we plan to implement a deprecation warning here, see KT-65578.
After this commit, 6 diagnostic tests become incorrectly broken:
- 5 tests from PurelyImplementedCollection group
- a test platformTypes/nullableTypeArgument.kt
This commit also breaks currently fixed-in-k2 KT-50134
(it is fixed again in the following commits),
as well as KT-58933 (it will remain not fixed till we enable KT-59138
behavior again).
#KT-65596 In Progress
#KT-57014 In Progress
#KT-58933 Submitted
This makes it more consistent and fixes some
overlooked corner cases. Also it was decided
on the last equality applicability DM
(KT-62646) that we'd like
`is`/`!is`/`as`/`as?` to work similarly
to `===`/`!==`.
Also note that it now gives a clearer
explaination of why some corner cases work
the way they do. For example,
`FirPsiDiagnosticTestGenerated.testLambdaInLhsOfTypeOperatorCall`
yields `UNCHECKED_CAST` instead of
`CAST_NEVER_SUCCEEDS`, because
`toTypeInfo()` replaces all type arguments
with star projections, even when the argument
is not a type parameter. This is because
it has been desided to work this way in
KT-57779.
In
`FirPsiOldFrontendDiagnosticsTestGenerated..NeverSucceeds#testNoGenericsRelated`
the diagnostic is introduced, because
`t2 as FC1` and `FC1` is a final class with
no `T5` supertype.
`UNCHECKED_CAST` in
`FirPsiOldFrontendDiagnosticsTestGenerated.testSmartCast`
disappeared, because previously we didn't
take smartcasts into account.
Note that
`FirPsiOldFrontendDiagnosticsTestGenerated.testMappedSubtypes`
is a false positive. It appears because `isSubtypeOf()` doesn't
take into account platform types in supertypes of the given types
(doesn't map them).
This is necessary for inference to work like in K1 because we only
add equality constraints from expected types on top-level `when`, not
on nested ones.
#KT-65882
This fixes some cases where we infer some type variable inside one
of the branches to Nothing instead of the expected type because Nothing
appeared in some other branch.
Specifically, we add an equality instead of a subtype constraint during
completion of calls to synthetic functions for if/when, try and !!.
We don't do it when the call contains a (possibly nested) elvis or is
inside the RHS of an assignment.
Otherwise, we would prevent some smart-casts.
#KT-65882 Fixed
The primary constructor of a class needs to be the first subgraph of the
class control-flow graph. Based on the Kotlin specification, class
initialization order goes first primary constructor, in-place
declarations (properties and init blocks), and then secondary
constructors. If the class doesn't have a primary constructor, then it
is just skipped in the order.
Unfortunately, the class control-flow graph had in-place declarations
first and then all constructors. Instead, we should treat the primary
constructor as the first in-place declaration, and then continue with
the existing processing as secondary constructors. This will guarantee
that super constructor calls have the correct property initialization
information.
^KT-65093 Fixed
This fixes some type argument mismatch errors caused by a captured type
being approximated and then captured again.
Some places need to be adapted to work with captured types that
previously only worked with approximated types.
#KT-62959 Fixed
There are many complications with the current design of passing data
from within in-place lambdas to surrounding code. Solving these
complications will involve more time to investigation than is available
within the K2 release. So we are disabling passing type statement
information from lambdas for the time being until more time can be
devoted to a more complete solution.
^KT-60958 Fixed
^KT-63530 Fixed
Terminating a CFG node because the result is Nothing should be reserved
for explicit Nothing type definitions, and not apply when smartcasting.
This allows boolean expressions to propagate implications correctly even
when the RHS is impossible or will never be executed.
^KT-47931 Fixed
In order to properly analyze top-level property initialization, a
control-flow graph must be created for FirFiles. This change adds the
foundation for the file CFG and updates body resolve to create the CFG.
Checking the CFG for proper initialization is separated into a following
change to ease code review.
KT-56683
When one side of an Elvis operator can only be `null`, and the entire
Elvis operator expression cannot be `null`, this implies that the
opposite side of the Elvis operator cannot be `null`. Add such
implications to the Elvis exit node of the DFA. This helps smart-casting
of variables used within long Elvis operator chains.
#KT-49249 Fixed
The change is needed for the parallel resolution (^KT-55750), so we can resolve the declaration
under a lock that is specific to this declaration.
Previously, if LL FIR was resolving some FirClass, LL FIR resolved all its children too, and it had no control over what parts of the FIR tree were modified.
The same applied to the designation path, sometimes the classes on the designation path
might be unexpectedly (and without lock) modified.
This commit introduces LLFirResolveTarget, which specifies which exact declarations should be resolved during the lazy resolution of the declaration.
All elements outside the declarations specified for resolve in LLFirResolveTarget, should not be modified.
The logic of lazy transformers is the following:
- Go to target declaration collecting all scopes from the file and containing classes
- Resolve only declarations that are specified by the LLFirResolveTarget, performing the resolve under a separate lock for each declaration
^KT-56543
^KT-57619 Fixed
The compiler should only report diagnostics for
comparisons over builtins and identity-less types,
other incompatibilities should be reported
via inspections.
It's ok that in `equalityChecksOnIntegerTypes`
instead of `EQUALITY_NOT_APPLICABLE_WARNING` we get
`EQUALITY_NOT_APPLICABLE`, because
`ProperEqualityChecksInBuilderInferenceCalls`
is already active by default.
This change also replaces the notion of a representative superclass
with the least upper bound.
This makes complex types like
intersection/flexible transparent to
RULES1-based compatibility checks.
One way to look at it is to think
that this is an automatic way of handling
type parameters: automatic picking of
"interesting" bounds, and checking them against one another.
Note that `TypeIntersector.intersectTypes`
for `Int` and `T` where `T` is a type parameter
may return both `{Int & T}` or `null`
depending on `T`-s bounds. At the same time,
for type parameters `T` and `K` it will
always return `{T & K}`.
`ConeTypeIntersector.intersectTypes`, on the
other hand, will always return `{Int & T}`
irrespectively of the bounds. Meaning, the two
intersectors differ in corner cases.
`lowerBoundIfFlexible` call in `isLiterallyTypeParameter` is backed by
the `equalityOfFlexibleTypeParameters` test.
^KT-35134 #fixed-in-k2
^KT-22499 #fixed-in-k2
^KT-46383 #fixed-in-k2
```
open class Base<T> {
fun foo(): T = ...
}
class Derived<T> : Base<T> {
override fun foo(): T = ...
}
```
In intersection scope of type `Base<T> & Other<R>` we should create
intersection override based on `Base.foo(): T` and `Derived.foo(): R`
at the same time, despite the fact that `Derived.foo` actually directly
overrides `Base.foo`
^KT-56722 Fixed
Also fix graphs for enums with specialized entries - since we don't
create property subgraphs for FirEnumEntry, there is no body to insert
AnonymousObjectEnterNode, AnonymousObjectExitNode, and
AnonymousObjectExpressionExitNode into.
function enter -> default 1 -> default 2 -> rest of function
\----------^ \----------^
This probably has no effect (in non-stupid code, at least), but it makes
graph construction more architecturally correct (now value parameters'
subgraphs get attached to a node).
Interpretation: a graph A is a subgraph of B if information available at
nodes of A depends on the paths taken in B. For example, local classes
are subgraphs of a graph in which they are declared, and members of
those classes are subgraphs of the local class itself - because these
members can reference captured values.
Consequences:
* if graph G is a subgraph of node N, then G is a subgraph of N's
owner;
* `ControlFlowAnalysisDiagnosticComponent` will only visit root graphs;
* `graph.traverse` will ignore subgraph boundaries, as if all subgraphs
are inlined into one huge root graph;
* if a control flow checker needs information from a declaration to
which a graph is attached, it must look at subgraphs explicitly.
For example, consider the `callsInPlace` checker. When a function
has a `callsInPlace` contract and a local declaration, the checker must
visit that local declaration to ensure it does not capture the allegedly
called-in-place argument - hence `graph.traverse` will look at the
nodes. However, the local declaration can also be a function with its
own `callsInPlace` contracts, so the checker should also run for it in
isolation. If that sounds quadratic, that's because unfortunately it is.
* `return` should only be added to the last statement if the return
type is not Unit
* If there is a `return` without an argument, then the expected return
type is Unit and the last expression is not a return argument (unless
it's an incomplete call, in which case it is inferred to return Unit;
this behavior is questionable, but inherited from K1)
* There should be a constraint on return arguments even if the expected
type is Unit, otherwise errors will be missed
* When the expected type is known, using the call completion results
writer is pointless (and probably subtly wrong).
^KT-54742 Fixed
Quick quiz:
Q: In a CFG, what does `a -> b -> c -> d` mean?
A: `a`, then `b`, then `c`, then `d`.
Q: In a CFG, what does `a -> b -> d; a -> c -> d` mean?
A: `a`, then `b` or `c`, then `d`.
Q: So how do you encode "a, then (b, then c) or (c, then b), then d`?
A: You can't.
Problem is, you need to, because that's what `a; run2({ b }, { c }); d`
does when `run2` has a contract that it calls both its lambda arguments
in-place: `shuffle(listOf(block1, block2)).forEach { it() }` is a
perfectly valid implementation for it, as little sense as that makes.
So that's what union nodes solve. When a node implements
`UnionNodeMarker`, its inputs are interpreted as "all visited in some
order" instead of the normal "one of the inputs is visited".
Currently this is used for data flow. It *should* also be used for
control flow, but it isn't. But it should be. But that's not so easy.
BTW, `try` exit is NOT a union node; although lambdas in one branch can
be completed according to types' of lambdas in another, data does not
flow between the branches anyway (since we don't know how much of the
`try` executed before jumping into `catch`, and `catch`es are mutually
exclusive) so a `try` expression is more like `when` than a function
call with called-in-place-exactly-once arguments. The fact that
`exitTryExpression` used `processUnionOfArguments` in a weird way
should've hinted at that, but now we know for certain.
Mikhail Glukhikh