The following tests are failing with exceptions and will be fixed in the
following commits
j+k/testKjkPropertyAndExtensionProperty.kt
j+k/testKjkImplicitReturnType.kt
#KT-62118 Fixed
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
There were several problems with it:
1) `isMoreSpecific` should return true if a == b. Otherwise
`isMoreSpecificThenAllOf` would never return true because it's always
invoked with a collection that contains the candidate. K1 behaves
similarly, `OverridingUtil.isMoreSpecific` returns true if a == b.
So in fact, "more" should be understood as "not less" here.
2) `transitivelyMostSpecificMember` in `selectMostSpecificMember` was
always equal to the first element, so `isMoreSpecific` was invoked
with incorrect arguments.
3) At the end of `selectMostSpecificMember`, we selected the first
candidate with the non-flexible return type, however only dynamic
type was considered. We need to check `isFlexible` via type system
instead.
#KT-66120 Fixed
Invert the logic of IR/FIR2IR-based generators: change the CLI argument
to -Xuse-fir-fake-override-builder, test directive to
USE_FIR_BASED_FAKE_OVERRIDE_GENERATOR, etc.
The changes in test data caused by using IR fake override builder by
default are in the subsequent commit.
#KT-61514
Previously @EnhancedNullability for IR type was added if only there wasn't
an @FlexibleNullability annotation, which is inconsistent with K1
behavior
^KT-65302 Fixed
In some cases we transform flexible type into non-flexible during
enhancement, but don't add `@EnhancedNullability` attribute to them,
which breaks consistency with K1 on IR level
This commit fixes it
^KT-65302
A class can inherit two declarations that are compatible from the
overridability standpoint and are therefore combined to a non-trivial
intersection.
At the same time, the class can declare a member declaration that
only overrides one of the intersection's members.
In this case, we break up the intersection and only add the overridden
parts to the declared member's direct overridden list.
If the class doesn't override the intersection, it exists as
intersection override, like before.
#KT-65487 Fixed
Aleksandra.Arsenteva