Also move internal declarations from runtime.jvm module into new package
kotlin.coroutines.jvm.internal in stdlib
The necessity of these declarations being in built-ins is controversial,
but also it will complicate the migration of current coroutine runtime
to a separate jar if we ever need this
Suspend function call with a reachable (alive) begin marker and unreachable (dead) end marker
is an exit point for the corresponding coroutine.
It isn't a suspension point, and doesn't introduce a new state in the coroutine FSM.
- Determine if there are non-tail calls to getValue/setValue simply
by existance of such a property
(it might be too strict, but implementing more granular check may be rather hard)
- Change in ExpressionCodegen is relevant for provideDelegate,
that in case of local variables uses OnStack as StackValue
(see the comment near these changes)
#KT-15933 Fixed
1. JVM view of suspend accessors must be also an instance of AccessorForFunctionDescriptor,
thus `createSubstitutedCopy` should be correctly overidden.
2. accessibleFunctionDescriptor should unwap the initial suspend descriptor,
for the same reasons as for type aliases constructors and etc:
these descriptors are used as keys of the map of accessors, so
to avoid duplication for suspend view and initial suspend descriptor,
we always use the latter one as a key.
#KT-15907 Fixed
#KT-15935 Fixed
When the extension receiver of a named suspend function was marked as used
from the inner lambda, codegen used to throw a "Don't know how to generate outer expression for class" exception.
It may seem quite tricky, but currently for suspend lambda body
its extension receiver is treated as it's defined inside the relevant "doResume"
(there is an actual bytecode part that fills the relevant local variable)
The problem was that inside ExpressionCodegen for "doResume" of named
suspend function we couldn't determine that original function has
an extension receiver.
#KT-15821 Fixed
#KT-15820 Fixed
If all the suspension calls in a suspend function were "hidden"
under the for-convention (iterator/next/hasNext) calls,
control-flow didn't find them, thus supposing that there is no
suspension points and there is no need to generate a coroutine state machine
The solution is to add relevant calls to CFG
#KT-15824 Fixed
Denis Zharkov