Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Refaster adds fully qualified reference to local variables in @AfterTemplate-lambdas → migration can't compile #90

Closed
Philzen opened this issue Jun 12, 2024 · 13 comments · Fixed by #111
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@Philzen
Copy link

Philzen commented Jun 12, 2024

The following template:

    public static class MigrateAssertEqualsFloatArrayDelta {

        @BeforeTemplate void before(float[] actual, float[] expected, float delta) {
            Assert.assertEquals(actual, expected, delta);
        }

        @AfterTemplate
        void after(float[] actual, float[] expected, float delta) {
            Assertions.assertAll(() -> {
                Assertions.assertEquals(expected.length, actual.length, "Arrays don't have the same size.");
                for (int i = 0; i < actual.length; i++) {
                    Assertions.assertEquals(expected[i], actual[i], delta);
                }
            });
        }
    }

Results in the following unexpected code:

     Assertions.assertAll(() -> {
-        Assertions.assertEquals(expected.length, actual.length, "Arrays don't have the same size.");
-        for (int i = 0; i < actual.length; i++) {
-            Assertions.assertEquals(expected[i], actual[i], 0.1f);
+        Assertions.assertEquals(expected.length, actual.length, "Arrays don\'t have the same size.");
+        for (int i = 0; MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsFloatArrayDelta.after.i < actual.length; MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsFloatArrayDelta.after.i++) {
+            Assertions.assertEquals(expected[MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsFloatArrayDelta.after.i], actual[MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsFloatArrayDelta.after.i], 0.1f);
         }
     });

(minor noteworthy detail: the single quote became needlessly escaped)

Looking into the recipe, it does hardcode that reference:

final JavaTemplate after = JavaTemplate
        .builder("org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertAll(()->{\n    org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertEquals(#{expected:anyArray(float)}.length, #{actual:anyArray(float)}.length, \"Arrays don\\'t have the same size.\");\n    for (final int i = 0; io.github.mboegers.openrewrite.testngtojupiter.MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsFloatArrayDelta.after.i < #{actual}.length; io.github.mboegers.openrewrite.testngtojupiter.MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsFloatArrayDelta.after.i++) {\n        org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertEquals(#{expected}[io.github.mboegers.openrewrite.testngtojupiter.MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsFloatArrayDelta.after.i], #{actual}[io.github.mboegers.openrewrite.testngtojupiter.MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsFloatArrayDelta.after.i], #{delta:any(float)});\n    }\n});")
        .javaParser(JavaParser.fromJavaVersion().classpath(JavaParser.runtimeClasspath()))
        .build();

I've already bumped into the unfortunate limitation that the @AfterTemplate may only contain a single statement. That's why i was hoping to be able to use a lambda here.

Looking at the refaster documentation, i could not find anything on limitations regarding variable access in the @AfterTemplate, only regarding placeholders and the @BeforeTemplate. Anyway this is not even accessing a variable that's out of scope, it is declared, initialized and thus scope-limited in that same block, which makes it even stranger that Refaster would try to put a full qualification on it.

This happens on rewrite-templating 1.9.2

@Philzen Philzen added the bug Something isn't working label Jun 12, 2024
Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2024
Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2024
Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2024
Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2024
@timtebeek
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @Philzen ; thanks for reporting this issue! Seems indeed like a bug. We're only using the API that Refaster offers and convert that into OpenRewrite recipes; as such we unfortunately don't yet support the full breadth of what's possible with Refaster itself, in part from not having seen a large variety yet.

In this case I'd lean towards at first recognize this as something uncovered and skip such templates for now; that's how we're only covering ~half of the Picnic Refaster rules. Then we can followup by looking at what might be necessary to support such cases, and how many recipes might benefit from this effort. Help in either department is much appreciated!

@timtebeek timtebeek moved this to Backlog in OpenRewrite Jun 12, 2024
@Philzen
Copy link
Author

Philzen commented Jun 13, 2024

The contributor over at google/error-prone#4432 (comment) was so kind to do a test confirming that this issue does not exist in "stock" Error Prone. So either it's a bug that was fixed in the upstream and hasn't been pulled into rewrite-templating yet, or it's one of its own customizations that causes this.

On an unrelated side note i just realised that my intended refaster recipe would be a very bad OpenRewrite citizen anyway and should never be allowed. That is b/c the lambda captures variables from the local scope – if they are not (effectively) final, applying the recipe would break the code it is run on, it could not compile anymore. The only way i could think of that would allow such a replacement is to include a check if all of the captured variables are final or effectively final, and skip the replacement if they aren't.

@timtebeek
Copy link
Contributor

thanks for reporting that insight back here; should we already close this issue then if the recipe is not a good fit for automated code changes? Or at least close it until we find a better fit?

@Philzen
Copy link
Author

Philzen commented Jun 13, 2024

My take is that this is an actual bug, as the variable that's generated faulty here is declared inside the lambda and therefore should be perfectly legal.

Regarding the mentioned insight on final / effectively final variables in a lambda my personal approach would actually be to even file another issue, because that may sooner or later lead to someone somewhere publishing a recipe that breaks code. Given the exceptional experiences i had so far with OpenRewrite and the project's sophistication perceived from my side i'd want to avoid that and improve the refaster generator to analyze JavaTemplates containing lambdas for any local scope variable references and their finality.

But ultimately I'd leave the decision whether to close or not up to you as i can sympathize with the desire to keep the issue count at a minimum.

Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 14, 2024
Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 14, 2024
Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 14, 2024
Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 14, 2024
Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 14, 2024
Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 14, 2024
Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 19, 2024
@Philzen
Copy link
Author

Philzen commented Jun 20, 2024

It transpired this happens not only to variables declared within the lambda scope, it happens to ALL variables belonging to that scope. Only the references from enclosing scope are OK.

I was hoping that using expression lambdas instead of statement lambdas (which seem get some autoformatting that includes line-breaks) could be a temporary workaround for #92, and this issue struck again:

public static class MigrateAssertEqualsDeep {
//…
    @AfterTemplate void after(Map<?, ?> actual, Map<?, ?> expected) {
        Assertions.assertIterableEquals(
            expected.entrySet().stream().map(entry -> {
                if(!entry.getValue().getClass().isArray()) return entry;
                // convert array to List as the assertion needs an Iterable for proper comparison
                return new AbstractMap.SimpleEntry<>(entry.getKey(), Arrays.toString((Object[]) entry.getValue()));
            }).collect(Collectors.toList()),
            actual.entrySet().stream().map(entry -> {
                if(!entry.getValue().getClass().isArray()) return entry;
                // convert array to List as the assertion needs an Iterable for proper comparison
                return new AbstractMap.SimpleEntry<>(entry.getKey(), Arrays.toString((Object[]) entry.getValue()));
            }).collect(Collectors.toList())
        );
    }
}

produces:

Assertions.assertIterableEquals(Map.of("expected", 11).entrySet().stream().map((entry) -> {
    if (!MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsDeep.after.entry.getValue().getClass().isArray()) return MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsDeep.after.entry;
    return new AbstractMap.SimpleEntry<>(MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsDeep.after.entry.getKey(), Arrays.toString((Object[]) MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsDeep.after.entry.getValue()));
}).collect(Collectors.toList()), Map.of("actual", 12).entrySet().stream().map((entry) -> {
    if (!MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsDeep.after.entry.getValue().getClass().isArray()) return MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsDeep.after.entry;
    return new AbstractMap.SimpleEntry<>(MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsDeep.after.entry.getKey(), Arrays.toString((Object[]) MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsDeep.after.entry.getValue()));
}).collect(Collectors.toList()));

It does not matter whether i use an expression lambda or a statement lambda as in the above example, all usages of the entry variable will get changed to MigrateAssertions.MigrateAssertEqualsDeep.after.entry.

Unless there is any workaround i haven't thought of yet (any ideas greatly appreciated) i would have to implement the above migration imperatively, forcing me to violate the "If it can be declarative, it should be declarative"-rule. Having said that, it's not really a violation as it currently simply cannot be implemented in a declarative way due to this bug 😉

@Philzen Philzen changed the title Refaster includes fully qualified reference to the @AfterTemplate on local variable inside the template Refaster adds fully qualified reference to any local variables in @AfterTemplate-lambdas → migration can't compile Jun 20, 2024
@Philzen Philzen changed the title Refaster adds fully qualified reference to any local variables in @AfterTemplate-lambdas → migration can't compile Refaster adds fully qualified reference to local variables in @AfterTemplate-lambdas → migration can't compile Jun 20, 2024
@Philzen

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@Philzen

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@timtebeek
Copy link
Contributor

You're not setting a classpath on your parser for the test. You'll want to update these lines to do something similar to what you see here. And if you're mainly using Maven, then you might be interested in these improvements to set the classpath recipe jars.

@Philzen

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Philzen added a commit to Philzen/rewrite-TestNG-to-JUnit5 that referenced this issue Jun 20, 2024
@Philzen

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@Philzen
Copy link
Author

Philzen commented Jun 21, 2024

@timtebeek I've narrowed down yesterdays issue as far as i was able to and filed

Have hidden yesterday's comments as "off-topic" in an effort to get the scope of this thread back on track. Kind thanks for your patience with those.

@knutwannheden knutwannheden linked a pull request Sep 15, 2024 that will close this issue
@knutwannheden
Copy link
Contributor

I think that #111 should fix this bug.

@knutwannheden
Copy link
Contributor

Also note the linked openrewrite/rewrite#4494 PR. Although that is only relevant when you use lambdas in the before template.

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Backlog to Done in OpenRewrite Sep 15, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants