Kotlin constructor invocation parsed as method invocation

[reisners]

I'm trying to use OpenRewrite (bom version 2.23.1, rewrite-kotlin 1.23.1) to do some static analysis on our Kotlin and Java Spring Boot codebase.
I noticed the following issue: OpenRewrite does not correctly parse invocations of constructors of Kotlin classes defined in 3rd party dependencies or even Kotlin standard library, e.g. Pair. It seems to interpret the constructor invocation as a method invocation and complains about the unknown return type, as can be seen in the following test case:

    @Test
    fun constructorInvocation() {
        rewriteRun(
            org.openrewrite.kotlin.Assertions.kotlin(
                """
                    class A(val x: String)

                    val a = A("x")
                    val pair = kotlin.Pair(1, "y") 
              """
                    .trimIndent()
            )
        )
    }

While the locally declared A("x") is correctly identified as a constructor invocation, the last line errors with

java.lang.IllegalStateException: LST contains missing or invalid type information
Identifier->MethodInvocation->NamedVariable->VariableDeclarations->CompilationUnit
/*~~(Identifier type is missing or malformed)~~>*/kotlin

	at org.openrewrite.kotlin.Assertions.assertValidTypes(Assertions.java:234)

(the behavior does not change if I use import statements)

[timtebeek]

Thanks for the runnable example @reisners ! Did you already explore what the cause might be?

[reisners]

I did some debugging, but not yet to a conclusive result. Will keep looking

[reisners]

To begin with, I was setting up the test wrongly, using the JavaParser builder instead of the KotlinParser.Builder, and I wasn't adding 3rd party dependencies to either parser's classpath (although this is irrelevant for the example code, I noticed that the same error also occurred when invoking the constructor of a class from some other 3rd party dependency).
However, my contrived example was afflicted by another problem: I had added kotlin 2.1 dependencies to the recipe project, but rewrite-kotlin only supports kotlin 1.9, and the presence of kotlin-stdlib 2.1 on the classpath seems to confuse the Fir parser (in a way which I did not bother analyzing further).
The mechanism for adding artifacts to the classpath does not allow to select only kotlin-stdlib 2.1 in favor of kotlin-stdlib-common-1.9.10 because of the limitations of the pattern matching. Therefore I wasn't table to test a configuration with only kotlin-stdlib 2.1.0 on the classpath.
But with only kotlin-stdlib-common-1.9.10 (by switching the entire project to kotlin 1.9), the above test passes without error.
I'm closing this issue and looking forward to testing it again when rewrite-kotlin supports kotlin 2.1.

[timtebeek]

Thanks for reporting your findings here! Indeed 2.1+ support is pending and tracked here; we're exploring a collaboration there.

• Compatibility with Kotlin 2.x #618

[reisners]

This may be an ill place but I just have to compliment you people on this project: the sheer volume of what you have built and the quality of the code, and last but not least the value it adds to the ecosystem. Best regards, Stefan

…

________________________________ From: Tim te Beek ***@***.***> Sent: Sunday, January 5, 2025 4:14:55 PM To: openrewrite/rewrite-kotlin ***@***.***> Cc: Dr. Stefan Reisner ***@***.***>; State change ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [openrewrite/rewrite-kotlin] Kotlin constructor invocation parsed as method invocation (Issue #622) Thanks for reporting your findings here! Indeed 2.1+ support is pending and tracked here; we're exploring a collaboration there. * #618<#618> — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#622 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAPKZTSD7VJMTWQOCRFVCYT2JE457AVCNFSM6AAAAABUPY4JVCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKNZRGY2DCMJYGI>. You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[timtebeek]

Thanks a lot for the kind words! Indeed a lot of work and passion has been poured into the project, and we feel fortunate with where we stand and the support from the wider community. I continue to look forward to where this will go. It's a big shift! :)