^KT-61573 Fixed
Review: https://jetbrains.team/p/kt/reviews/11969/timeline
Tests:
- MultiPlatformIntegrationTestGenerated
- CliTestGenerated
- MultiPlatformIntegrationTestGenerated
- DiagnosticTestGenerated.Multiplatform
- FirLightTreeOldFrontendDiagnosticsTestGenerated
Also add -Xexpect-actual-classes flag to all necessary ./libraries/* modules
Otherwise compilation of those modules failes because of `-Werror`
Review: https://jetbrains.team/p/kt/reviews/11039/timeline
For StrongIncompatible `actual` declaration is considered as overload
and error reports on expected declaration. For WeakIncompatible the
error is reported straight away
Before the refactoring `areCompatibleClassScopes` returned just
`Incompatible`. It is bad because StrongIncompatible isn't possible for
classes (classes can't be overloaded). Now all class incompatibilities
are weak.
The commit has a minor impact on observable behavior (cases where we
reported the compilation problems are still reported but on another
elements):
- We no longer report type parameter class incompatibilities on expect
declaration, we report them only on actuals (it happened because all
WeakIncompatible are reported only on actuals)
- In a sense, Java implicit actualization was the only way to "overload"
classes (it would be a redeclaration compilation problem, so it
doesn't count as a valid "overload"). And since type parameters
incompatibility was StrongIncompatible for classes, we counted them as
"overloads" and didn't report incompatibility problems on Kotlin
class. Now we do report. (see
implicitJavaActualization_multipleActuals)
In K1 .isFun is always false for Java classes, so extra check
is added for that. This is not needed for K2, because .isFun is
true for all Java classes. Here it is not necessary to check
that interface has only one method, because such check will be
done in the place where interface implementation is created.
^KT-39362 Fixed
Using files turned to be a bad idea, because people often
use the same name for files with expects and with corresponding actuals.
This commits disambiguiates ambiguous message for
AMBIGUOUS_ACTUALS/AMBGIUOUS_EXPECTS diagnostics by using modules instead
of files
^KT-32582 Fixed
Also make TypeParameterUpperBounds a "strong" incompatibility, meaning
that non-actual members from platform module are _not_ going to be
matched to the expected members if this incompatibility exists between
them, and therefore NO_ACTUAL_FOR_EXPECT will be reported on the
expected declaration, instead of ACTUAL_MISSING on the platform member.
This is needed because the difference in type parameter upper bounds can
have effect on the function signature on the platform (e.g. on JVM,
Array<T> -> T[], but Array<T> -> Comparable[] if T : Comparable<T>), and
it would be incorrect to report ACTUAL_MISSING on the member that has
nothing to do with the expected declaration that happens to coincide
with it in everything except type parameter bounds
#KT-21864 Fixed
Try to report most mismatch errors on the 'impl' declaration. Only
report a mismatch error on the 'header' declaration if no error would be
otherwise reported on any 'impl' declaration in the compilation unit.
Also render declaration kind in the message
#KT-18447 In Progress
For each platform declaration, there must be at least one impl declaration in
the module with the compatible signature; similarly, for each impl declaration,
there must be at least one platform declaration with the compatible signature.
Note that currently the presence of the 'impl' modifier is not checked yet.
Also, the sad fact is that if you have platform and impl declarations which are
not compatible, you get two errors: on the platform delcaration and on the impl
declaration. This needs to be addressed as well
Evgeniy.Zhelenskiy