- `.ll.kt` test data can be added in cases where LL FIR resolution
legally diverges from K2 compiler results.
- Each `.ll.kt` test is prefixed with an `LL_FIR_DIVERGENCE` directive
which must explain why the test may diverge from K2 compiler results.
- `LLFirDivergenceCommentChecker` ensures that each `.ll.kt` file
contains an `LL_FIR_DIVERGENCE` directive.
- `LLFirIdenticalChecker` results in an assertion error if the `.ll.kt`
test and its base test are completely identical, including in their
meta info (but ignoring `LL_FIR_DIVERGENCE`).
- The checker additionally ensures that the base source file and the
`.ll.kt` source file have identical Kotlin source code (ignoring
meta info and `LL_FIR_DIVERGENCE`). This ensures that both tests
test the exact same thing.
- `.ll.kt` files are ignored by select test generators, in addition to
`.fir.kt` files.
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.
They are only used in one place that can just as well use kinds.
Especially considering that "the one place" used them incorrectly and
would not attach local functions in property accessors as subgraphs.
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
- If too few or too many type arguments were provided, they were all
thrown away in `TypeArgumentMapping`,
`FirCallCompletionResultsWriterTransformer`, and `KtFirCallResolver`.
The fix handles type arguments of the wrong arity more gracefully.
- Note for `TypeArgumentMapping`: Excess type arguments are not needed
for candidate resolution. Excess type arguments are still resolved
due to the handling in `FirCallCompletionResultsWriterTransformer`.
- Post-processing in `AllCandidatesResolver`: When all candidates are
resolved in `AllCandidatesResolver.getAllCandidates`, the function
builds a FIR file. During that resolution, the
`generic<String, String>` call (in example
`functionCallWithTooFewTypeArguments.kt`) is correctly marked as
inapplicable, but the missing type argument is inferred as an error
type. `firFile` then contains a function call
`generic<String, String, ERROR>` instead of `generic<String, String>`.
This call is still marked as inapplicable. Despite that, the
*subsequent* resolution by
`bodyResolveComponents.callResolve.collectAllCandidates` disregards
the call's inapplicability and resolves successfully into an
applicable candidate. This is because `CandidateFactory` doesn't make
any guarantees for already inapplicable calls. The fix adds
post-processing to `AllCandidatesResolver` to preserve candidate
inapplicability.
- Most tests that this commit changes had slightly different results due
to type arguments becoming resolvable.
- `wrongNumberOfTypeArguments.kt` and
`wrongNumberOfArgumentsInTypeAliasConstructor.kt`:
`ConeDiagnostic.toFirDiagnostics` prefers specific errors. Because
`ARGUMENT_TYPE_MISMATCH` is specific and `INAPPLICABLE_CANDIDATE` is
not, only the former is reported. I see no reason to pass an illegally
typed argument in either test, so the change reduces the errors to
`INAPPLICABLE_CANDIDATE`.
- `typeAliasSamAdapterConstructors2.fir.kt`: See KT-55007.
- Disable `mismatchTypeParameters` JS backend test due to its handling
of excess type arguments. See KT-55250.
^KT-54980 fixed
The original idea was in resolving of annotation type ref using only
importing scopes and accepting or discarding that resolution result
depending on if this annotation is needed for compiler/plugins or not
But there is a problem that resolution of FirUserType with type resolver
is not a pure operation: type resolver transforms qualifier parts which
may contain type arguments, so if they were unresolved at the first
resolve, they will stay unresolved forever. To prevent this we will
deeply copy annotation type ref before first resolution
^KT-55286 Fixed
In K1 analogue of `K2_VISIBILITY_ERROR` is `K1_RUNTIME_ERROR`, so
candidates with `K2_VISIBILITY_ERROR` should win over innaplicable
candidates with `INAPPLICABLE`, `INAPPLICABLE_ARGUMENTS_MAPPING_ERROR`
or `INAPPLICABLE_WRONG_RECEIVER` applicability
This is needed to allow resolution to invisible symbols (and later
suppress error with `@Suppress("INVISIBLE_SYMBOL", "INVISIBLE_REFERENCE")`
^KT-55026 Fixed
^KT-55234
This is a temporary hack to avoid compiler crashes in some code that
uses builder inference, conditional early returns from lambdas, and
expected types in a certain way. It is not correct - dropping data flow
edges never is - but it is much easier to implement for now than a
proper fix.
This removes the need for hacks around the order in which function
call arguments are visited, fixes called-in-place lambda arguments
for augmented assignment operators, and makes CFG dumps a bit prettier.
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.
It's also not a backwards jump in do-while, unless it's in the loop's
condition, which is a stupid "feature" IMO. As you can probably tell
from the comments added in this commit.
Previously, statuses of superclass which are not local was not ignored
Sometimes it worked in the IDE by calling lazyResolveToPhase
which is a violation of the lazy resolution contract
^KT-54890
Previously, statuses of superclass which are not local was not ignored
Sometimes it worked in the IDE by calling lazyResolveToPhase
which is a violation of the lazy resolution contract
^KT-54890
Marco Pennekamp