# Check-out https://www.jetbrains.com/help/space/code-owners.html#codeowners-file-syntax
# This file is checked by org.jetbrains.kotlin.code.SpaceCodeOwnersTest
# Directive OWNER_LIST specifies possible values for owner field
# Directive UNKNOWN specifies that path is unclaimed
# Ownership must be exhaustive modulo UNKNOWN

# OWNER_LIST: Kotlin
# OWNER_LIST: "Kotlin Libraries"
# OWNER_LIST: "Kotlin JVM" "Kotlin Native" "Kotlin Wasm" "Kotlin Common Backend"

     * a KDoc reference should be considered as legal and resolved, and false otherwise.
     *
     * This is **not** an actual type check, it is just an opinionated approximation.
     * The main guideline was K1 KDoc resolve.
     *
     * This check might change in the future, as Dokka team advances with KDoc rules.
     */

            if (containingFile == null || containingFile.declarations.firstOrNull() !is FirScript) {
                // Should be replaced with proper check after KT-61451 and KT-61887
                return false
            }
        }

        val firSymbol = symbol.firSymbol
        if (firSymbol is FirPropertySymbol && firSymbol.isForeignValue) {

        check(type is KtFirType) { "KtFirScopeProvider can only work with KtFirType, but ${type::class} was provided" }
        return getFirTypeScope(type)
            ?.withSyntheticPropertiesScopeOrSelf(type.coneType)
            ?.let { convertToKtTypeScope(it) }
    }

    override fun getSyntheticJavaPropertiesScope(type: KtType): KtTypeScope? {

                bindingTrace, resolutionScope, call, TypeUtils.NO_EXPECTED_TYPE, dataFlowInfo,
                ContextDependency.INDEPENDENT, CheckArgumentTypesMode.CHECK_VALUE_ARGUMENTS,
                /* isAnnotationContext = */ false, analysisContext.languageVersionSettings,
                dataFlowValueFactory
            ).replaceCollectAllCandidates(true)