CoroutineTransformermethodVisitor attempts to extend the ranges
of local variables in various situations. Probably in an attempt
to give a better debugging experience. However, all of these
range extensions lead to invalid local variable tables where
something is in the local variable table where nothing is in the
corresponding slot.
The code that extends variables to the next suspension point
instead of ending them when they are no longer live has issues
with loops. When resuming and reentering the loop, the locals
table will mention a local that we did not spill and which
is therefore not restored when resuming.
The code that extends local variable table entries if there
are no suspension points between two entries doesn't work
for code such as:
```
var s: String
if (suspendHere() == "OK") {
s = "OK"
} else {
s = "FAIL"
}
```
If the local variable ranges are collapsed into one, one of
the branches will have the local defined in the local variable
table before the slot is initialized.
The coroutine transformation would leave locals in the local
variable table across the code that reloads local variables from
the continuation on reentry. However, when reentering the function
the local has no value until after the reloads from the
continuation.
This change splits the locals in the local variable table to
avoid such uninitialized locals. A local alive across a
suspension point has its range split in two. One that goes
from the original start to the state label for the restart
after the suspension. The other goes from after the local
has been reloaded from the continuation until the previous
end of the local.
This solves no immediate deficiency, but is a to-do that arose as part
of an ongoing effort to port the old, slightly too restrictive
checkLocalVariableTable tests to the more "functional" debugger
infrastructure.
This just shaves a little bit of overhead off the test expectations
and couples them less tightly to the specifics of the test
infrastructure.
Reveals discrepancy in LVT presence on lambda implementations on the
old and new backend.
The generated code in the constructors of Suspend Lambda objects is
identical, but the IR backend generates an LVT with the constructor
parameters.
The user has to be very insistent to see this ("for step into" +
disabling "Show only kotlin variables"), but it is an observable
difference.
Mads Ager