[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-12441?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18133676#comment-18133676
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on GROOVY-12441:
-----------------------------------------
codecov-commenter commented on PR #3068:
URL: https://github.com/apache/groovy/pull/3068#issuecomment-6474588055
##
[Codecov](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/pull/3068?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=h1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)
Report
:x: Patch coverage is `60.82090%` with `105 lines` in your changes missing
coverage. Please review.
:white_check_mark: Project coverage is 73.5873%. Comparing base
([`cfd9b2f`](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/commit/cfd9b2f0222a8e1a74473f7c5b2cb45b5bdd3b5b?dropdown=coverage&el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache))
to head
([`aaa9600`](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/commit/aaa96009b052bb5ba9695e77421c954da5ea130d?dropdown=coverage&el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)).
:warning: Report is 2 commits behind head on master.
| [Files with missing
lines](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/pull/3068?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)
| Patch % | Lines |
|---|---|---|
|
[...ransform/stc/SharedVariableExpressionRewriter.java](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/pull/3068?src=pr&el=tree&filepath=src%2Fmain%2Fjava%2Forg%2Fcodehaus%2Fgroovy%2Ftransform%2Fstc%2FSharedVariableExpressionRewriter.java&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache#diff-c3JjL21haW4vamF2YS9vcmcvY29kZWhhdXMvZ3Jvb3Z5L3RyYW5zZm9ybS9zdGMvU2hhcmVkVmFyaWFibGVFeHByZXNzaW9uUmV3cml0ZXIuamF2YQ==)
| 59.7701% | [72 Missing and 33 partials :warning:
](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/pull/3068?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)
|
<details><summary>Additional details and impacted files</summary>
[](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/pull/3068?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)
```diff
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #3068 +/- ##
==================================================
- Coverage 73.6047% 73.5873% -0.0175%
- Complexity 42348 42424 +76
==================================================
Files 1657 1658 +1
Lines 145708 145975 +267
Branches 27498 27573 +75
==================================================
+ Hits 107248 107419 +171
- Misses 28479 28543 +64
- Partials 9981 10013 +32
```
| [Files with missing
lines](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/pull/3068?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)
| Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
|
[...roovy/transform/stc/StaticTypeCheckingVisitor.java](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/pull/3068?src=pr&el=tree&filepath=src%2Fmain%2Fjava%2Forg%2Fcodehaus%2Fgroovy%2Ftransform%2Fstc%2FStaticTypeCheckingVisitor.java&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache#diff-c3JjL21haW4vamF2YS9vcmcvY29kZWhhdXMvZ3Jvb3Z5L3RyYW5zZm9ybS9zdGMvU3RhdGljVHlwZUNoZWNraW5nVmlzaXRvci5qYXZh)
| `87.4653% <100.0000%> (-0.0057%)` | :arrow_down: |
|
[...ransform/stc/SharedVariableExpressionRewriter.java](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/pull/3068?src=pr&el=tree&filepath=src%2Fmain%2Fjava%2Forg%2Fcodehaus%2Fgroovy%2Ftransform%2Fstc%2FSharedVariableExpressionRewriter.java&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache#diff-c3JjL21haW4vamF2YS9vcmcvY29kZWhhdXMvZ3Jvb3Z5L3RyYW5zZm9ybS9zdGMvU2hhcmVkVmFyaWFibGVFeHByZXNzaW9uUmV3cml0ZXIuamF2YQ==)
| `59.7701% <59.7701%> (ø)` | |
... and [10 files with indirect coverage
changes](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/groovy/pull/3068/indirect-changes?src=pr&el=tree-more&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)
</details>
<details><summary> :rocket: New features to boost your workflow: </summary>
- :snowflake: [Test
Analytics](https://docs.codecov.com/docs/test-analytics): Detect flaky tests,
report on failures, and find test suite problems.
- :package: [JS Bundle
Analysis](https://docs.codecov.com/docs/javascript-bundle-analysis): Save
yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.
</details>
> STC gets confused when THIS_EXPRESSION is used
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GROOVY-12441
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GROOVY-12441
> Project: Groovy
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 2.5.23, 3.0.25, 4.0.33, 5.1.3, 6.0.0
> Reporter: Björn Kautler
> Assignee: Daniel Sun
> Priority: Major
>
> If you use {{VariableExpression.THIS_EXPRESSION}} the STC and thus
> static-compile gets confused.
> I assume this is a bug, if it is expected, sorry for the noise.
> We use this at some places in the Spock transform.
> While trying to make Spock specs compatible with STC and SC, it was observed
> that STC stores type information at the current node and using
> {{VariableExpression.THIS_EXPRESSION}} then causes conflicting casts when
> used inside and outside a closure.
> As a work-around we can instead use {{{}new VariableExpression("this"){}}},
> but I guess this actually is a bug, thus this report.
> As an example.
> {code:java}
> class ASpec extends Specification {
> def "mock init closure"() {
> given:
> List<String> list = Mock(List) {
> size() >> 3
> }
> when:
> int size = list.size()
> then:
> size == 3
> }
> }
> {code}
> compiles in semantic analysis to
> {code:java}
> import spock.lang.*
> @org.spockframework.runtime.model.SpecMetadata(filename = 'script.groovy',
> line = 1)
> public class ASpec extends spock.lang.Specification {
> @org.spockframework.runtime.model.FeatureMetadata(name = 'mock init
> closure', ordinal = 0, line = 2, blocks =
> [@org.spockframework.runtime.model.BlockMetadata(kind =
> org.spockframework.runtime.model.BlockKind.SETUP, texts = []),
> @org.spockframework.runtime.model.BlockMetadata(kind =
> org.spockframework.runtime.model.BlockKind.WHEN, texts = []),
> @org.spockframework.runtime.model.BlockMetadata(kind =
> org.spockframework.runtime.model.BlockKind.THEN, texts = [])], parameterNames
> = [])
> public void $spock_feature_0_0() {
> org.spockframework.runtime.ValueRecorder $spock_valueRecorder = new
> org.spockframework.runtime.ValueRecorder()
> org.spockframework.runtime.ErrorCollector $spock_errorCollector =
> org.spockframework.runtime.ErrorRethrower.INSTANCE
> org.spockframework.runtime.SpockRuntime.callBlockEntered(this, 0)
> java.util.List<String> list =
> org.spockframework.runtime.SpecInternals.MockImpl(this, 'list',
> java.util.List, java.util.List, { ->
>
> this.getSpecificationContext().getMockController().addInteraction(new
> org.spockframework.mock.runtime.InteractionBuilder(5, 7, 'size() >>
> 3').addEqualTarget(it).addEqualMethodName('size').setArgListKind(true,
> false).addConstantResponse(3).build())
> })
> org.spockframework.runtime.SpockRuntime.callBlockExited(this, 0)
> org.spockframework.runtime.SpockRuntime.callBlockEntered(this, 1)
> java.lang.Integer size = list.size()
> org.spockframework.runtime.SpockRuntime.callBlockExited(this, 1)
> org.spockframework.runtime.SpockRuntime.callBlockEntered(this, 2)
> try {
>
> org.spockframework.runtime.SpockRuntime.verifyCondition($spock_errorCollector,
> $spock_valueRecorder.reset(), 'size == 3', 12, 5, null,
> $spock_valueRecorder.record($spock_valueRecorder.startRecordingValue(2),
> $spock_valueRecorder.record($spock_valueRecorder.startRecordingValue(0),
> size) ==
> $spock_valueRecorder.record($spock_valueRecorder.startRecordingValue(1), 3)))
> }
> catch (java.lang.Throwable $spock_condition_throwable) {
>
> org.spockframework.runtime.SpockRuntime.conditionFailedWithException($spock_errorCollector,
> $spock_valueRecorder, 'size == 3', 12, 5, null, $spock_condition_throwable)}
> finally {
> }
> org.spockframework.runtime.SpockRuntime.callBlockExited(this, 2)
> this.getSpecificationContext().getMockController().leaveScope()
> }
> }
> {code}
> The important part here is the two {{getSpecificationContext()}} calls, one
> inside the mock init closure, one as last line in the feature method, both
> added by the Spock transform.
> If those use {{VariableExpression.THIS_EXPRESSION}} then at runtime you get
> {{{}java.lang.ClassCastException: apackage.ASpec cannot be cast to
> apackage.ASpec$__spock_feature_0_0_closure1{}}}.
> If you use {{new VariableExpression("this")}} instead, it works as intended.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v10.3.26#10030026)
