In box tests, only check that Java reflection does not crash on the
EnclosingMethod attribute generated in these classes. If it doesn't
crash, most likely it returns the value that can be read from the class
file by ASM, which is what the newly added bytecode listing tests are
checking now.
so that the enclosing method of objects defined inside lambdas is the
one they are declared in.
Note that this does not fix *all* enclosingInfo tests because JVM_IR
currently follows the KT-28064 proposal, i.e. does not regenerate
objects defined inside lambdas under any circumstances. For example,
this causes test boxInline/enclosingInfo/inlineChain2.kt to fail because
the enclosing method of objects is _2Kt.box instead of (non-existent in
source code) `_2Kt$box$inlined$call$1.invoke` or whatever. What's more
important is that OUTERCLASS no longer points to a non-existent
`box$lambda-N` and therefore `.enclosingMethod` no longer throws.
Namely, anonymous objects defined in lambdas that have all captured
variables as loose fields instead of a single reference to the parent.
The question is, when a lambda inside an inline function defines an
anonymous object, and that object is not regenerated during codegen for
the inline function itself, but then has to be regenerated at call site
anyway, do we use an outer `this` or loose capture fields? For example,
before KT-28064:
inline fun f1(g: () -> Unit) = object { g() }
// -> f1$1 { $g: () -> Unit }
inline fun f2(g: () -> Unit) = f1 { object { g() } }
// -> f2$$inlined$f1$1 { $g: () -> Unit }
// f2$$inlined$f1$1$lambda$1 { this$0: f2$$inlined$f1$1 }
inline fun f3(g: () -> Unit) = f2 { object { g() } }
// -> f3$$inlined$f2$1 { $g: () -> Unit }
// f3$$inlined$f2$1$1 { this$0: f3$$inlined$f2$1 }
// f3$$inlined$f2$1$1$lambda$1 { this$0: f3$$inlined$f2$1$1 }
After KT-28064:
inline fun f2(g: () -> Unit) = f1 { object { g() } }
// -> f2$$inlined$f1$1 { $g: () -> Unit }
// f2$1$1 { $g: () -> Unit }
inline fun f3(g: () -> Unit) = f2 { object { g() } }
// -> f3$$inlined$f2$1 { $g: () -> Unit }
// f3$$inlined$f2$2 { ??? }
// f3$1$1 { $g: () -> Unit }
Should `???` be `this$0: f3$$inlined$f2$1` or `$g: () -> Unit`? This
commit chooses the latter for KT-28064 bytecode and keeps `this$0` when
inlining the old bytecode.
This patch mutes the following test categories:
* Tests with java dependencies (System class,
java stdlib, jvm-oriented annotations etc).
* Coroutines tests.
* Reflection tests.
* Tests with an inheritance from the standard
collections.
Dmitriy Novozhilov