Sergej Jaskiewicz
6e8283a6fe
The reason #1 for this feature is that we want to test IdSignatures generated for declarations. Currently, there is no (easy) way to ensure that a change in the signature building logic doesn't cause any breaking changes wrt klibs. Now, most IdSignatures include hashed mangled names in them, so even if we catch a regression where the included hash changes, there would be no way of knowing immediately what caused it, unless we'd also have mangled names in the expectations. The reason #2 is to test the manglers themselves. Currently, there are no tests for them. They heavily duplicate each other, this is already causing issues (see KT-57427) that would be very hard to catch without these tests. ^KT-58238 Fixed
29 lines
588 B
Kotlin
Vendored
29 lines
588 B
Kotlin
Vendored
// FIR_IDENTICAL
|
|
// !LANGUAGE: +ContextReceivers
|
|
// IGNORE_BACKEND_K1: JS_IR
|
|
// IGNORE_BACKEND_K1: JS_IR_ES6
|
|
|
|
// MUTE_SIGNATURE_COMPARISON_K2: ANY
|
|
// ^ KT-57429, KT-57435
|
|
|
|
class A<T>(val a: T)
|
|
class B(val b: Any)
|
|
class C(val c: Any)
|
|
|
|
context(labelAInt@A<Int>, A<String>, labelB@B) fun f() {
|
|
this@labelAInt.a.toFloat()
|
|
this@A.a.length
|
|
this@labelB.b
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
context(labelAInt@A<Int>, A<String>, labelB@B) val C.p: Int
|
|
get() {
|
|
this@labelAInt.a.toFloat()
|
|
this@A.a.length
|
|
this@labelB.b
|
|
this@C.c
|
|
this@p.c
|
|
this.c
|
|
return 1
|
|
}
|