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
Otherwise, exception from org.jetbrains.kotlin.resolve.calls.inference.components.ConstraintInjector.TypeCheckerStateForConstraintInjector.fixedTypeVariable
might happen during forks resolution
The test data is extracted from intelliJ FP test
^KT-43296 Fixed
The idea is that we should not fix (i.e. choose any of the fork branches)
on the stage of candidate processing before completion, but it's enough
just to check that current state can be converged to success.
And when completion starts, and we add expected type to the system,
we've got more information to choose the correct fork branch.
NB: The old `processForkConstraints` is being called just
at the beginning of the completion phase.
^KT-43296 In Progress
That issue might be fixed via changing
TypeVariableMarker.shouldBeFlexible at ConeConstraintSystemUtilContext
but this and some other tricks have been added because of incorrect
handling of constraints where type variable has a flexible bound
^KT-51168 Fixed
In this commit we upgrade FIR builder inference logic from
the compiler version to 1.7. FIR-based compiler now works with
"don't use builder inference" flag always ON and supports switching
the flag "use builder inference only if needed". To do it,
ContraintSystemCompleter (FIR) and KotlinConstraintSystemCompleter (FE 1.0)
are made similar with extracting some common parts into
ConstraintSystemCompletionContext.
Test status: one BB test fails after this commit (KT-49285).
Also we have a crush in DFA logic in FIR bootstrap test and somehow
questionable behavior in FIR diagnostic test. However,
two BB tests were fixed, the 3rd case from KT-49925 were also fixed.
#KT-49925 Fixed
It's safe as not having const is more restrictive, therefore can be
allowed in common. Otherwise, it's not possible to declare an expect
declaration for a platform property with `const` modifier in common
KT-18856
Mostly, it only affects FIR
It partially allows to consider several variance of constraints like
A<Int> & A<T> <: A<X_var> that are mostly brought by smart casts
^KT-49542 Fixed
^KT-50489 Relates
Mikhail Glukhikh