[K2] Inconsistent member representation for Java/Kotlin files

[atyrin]

Parent.java:

public class Parent {
    protected int protectedPropertyWithPublicGetterPublicSetter = 0;

    public int getProtectedPropertyWithPublicGetterPublicSetter() {
        return protectedPropertyWithPublicGetterPublicSetter;
    }

    public void setProtectedPropertyWithPublicGetterPublicSetter(int protectedPropertyWithPublicGetterPublicSetter) {
        this.protectedPropertyWithPublicGetterPublicSetter = protectedPropertyWithPublicGetterPublicSetter;
    }
}

Child.kt

open class Child: Parent()

In K1, both pages look the same:

---

In K2, the page for Java parent looks the same as in K1. But for Kotlin, inheritor getter/setter methods are omitted.

Representation in K2 for Kotlin files looks correct (as no getters/setters are available in the code). But it seems for the Java class, it should be the same.

Installation

• Dokka version: 1.9.20

Parent: #3328

[atyrin]

Related: #3128

[IgnatBeresnev]

For the given code, the child's page and the parent's page should look the same, as for the K2 child's page, so like this

[IgnatBeresnev]

Blocked by #3576

[vmishenev]

The summary based on the spike #3576:
Presumably we decided to show a backing field, a getter, and a setter always.
We are going to ask to validate our decision other teams, e.g. Kotlin Evolution (as they can have plans on https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-6653).

---

We are not sure about the case with a private field:

public class A {
   private int prop = 1;
   public int getProp() {
       return prop;
   }
   public void setProp(int a) {
       this.prop = a;
   }
}

Should Dokka display accessors here?! Despite the counter-example below, It seems a field and its accessors should be an united entity.

class B : A() {
    override fun getProp(): Int {
        ....
    }
    override fun setProp(a: Int) {
        ...
    }
}