Function names lost with 1.6

[pmecho]

When using Compose 1.6.0, the function names are no longer available. This is reproduced in the nestedLayouts test which fails:

expected to contain:
Box:
 Box { test-tag:"root" }
 ├─Box
 ├─Column
 │ ├─Box
 │ ╰─Box
 ╰─Row
   ├─Box
   ╰─Box
but was:
:
  { test-tag:"root" }
 ├─
 ├─
 │ ├─
 │ ╰─
 ╰─
   ├─
   ╰─

at radiography.test.compose.ComposeUiTest.nestedLayouts(ComposeUiTest.kt:350)

It looks to be related to this change in Compose: https://android-review.googlesource.com/c/platform/frameworks/support/+/2741462. However, it doesn't seem as simple as calling composer.collectParameterInformation().

[pmecho]

That test passes with 1.6.0-alpha05 but fails in alpha06. The alpha06 build was the first to contain that change in the description so it does seem more likely that that is the issue: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/support/+log/9ce75ea1baa2af10dda8f787f69c40c6654bcac1..91bb8c1f81dcb031bda00fcd8e55f1e890b56f06/compose/ui

[pmecho]

It looks like you can access the composer via the androidx.compose.runtime.currentComposer global val when in composition. A workaround would be to call currentComposer.collectParameterInformation() in the setContent block prior to adding any composables. I'm not quite sure what the holistic fix for this is but a few options come to mind:

• Document that this call must be made and add it to all tests
• Create a custom rule that calls this automatically

I wonder if this global val could also replace the reflection done in ComposeViews.tryGetLayoutInfos to get the composer. Though I'm not sure the level of refactoring that would need to be done to do that as that would require a composable scope.

[zach-klippenstein]

Discussed a bit offline. Radiography doesn't directly insert itself into the composition, so it's not easy to get the "current" composer in the general case. However, for this specific use case, inside a test, Radiography could probably provide a helper that would set things up correctly.

[pyricau]

How could we make this work beyond tests? Can we grab the component from the compose view?

Also, @zach-klippenstein could this use case maybe be considered by the Compose team :) ? Is it really unreasonable to need access to an API that allows us to describe a compose hierarchy and export that somewhere?

[justin-fiedler]

Hi @zach-klippenstein, thanks for this great library!

I am also running into this issue of missing names with ui-tooling:^1.6.0.

Is there any update or known workaround?

[DanGavrielov]

Hi @zach-klippenstein
Was wondering if there has been any updates on this issue?