A modern programming language that makes developers happier.

kotlinlang

Is JVM-IR already supported for scripting? I had some problems running JVM-IR code from kotlin-jupyter (as always, it is serialization runtime). And JVM-IR is almost the default now.

There is some support, but it turned off by default. It will remain so for some time, we are not sure that it is mature enough yet.
The short term plan is to fix some known issues (almost done) and after it will land on some EAP/release - announce a way to turn it on experimentally.

My problem is with this bug: <https://github.com/Kotlin/kotlin-jupyter/issues/131>. It is related to serialization, but arises only in jupyter.

The problem arises only in the xml, but it seems to be caused by the serialization runtime.

And here is the reproducer (at least in jupyter):
```@file:DependsOn("org.jetbrains.kotlinx:kotlinx-serialization-core-jvm:1.1.0")
import kotlinx.serialization.builtins.*
Boolean.serializer().descriptor.isInline```

cc <@U0YD63XDY> since I've reported it in the xmlutil.

I was under the impression that isInline is available in the non-IR version of the serialization library (of the new version)

The problem seems to be Jupyter-specific. It substitutes the serialization runtime from the library with the one it uses itself. For Json it works probably because Json does not use this function in the code without exlicit inline objects.

<@U0CHHN4F4> We've already fixed this. The problem was that jupyter kernel leaked its own classpath on top of script class-path.

But I think that it is somehow related to scripting because this leak should not be possible. As far as I can understand <@UQ8NE6A86>  simpli bloced internal libraries propagation: <https://github.com/Kotlin/kotlin-jupyter/commit/adaadf2bbedf67a4560b14b59269703b96226497>

`api` artifact needs to expose `kotlinx-serialization` as `implementation`  / `api` as it's the part of its API, and it doesn't work without it (i.e. with `compileOnly`). But it adds `kotlinx-serialization` transitively to deploy configuration which is undesired for us, so I've excluded it manually.