Update Coverage for Ruby 3.2 interface changes.

[mtortonesi]

This patch request should fix issue #3149.

Based on #3150

Thanks to @ioquatix and @eregon.

[oracle-contributor-agreement]

Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community! To contribute, please sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement (OCA).
The following contributors of this PR have not signed the OCA:

• PR author: @mtortonesi
• [email protected] (@mtortonesi)

To sign the OCA, please create an Oracle account and sign the OCA in Oracle's Contributor Agreement Application.

When signing the OCA, please provide your GitHub username. After signing the OCA and getting an OCA approval from Oracle, this PR will be automatically updated.

If you are an Oracle employee, please make sure that you are a member of the main Oracle GitHub organization, and your membership in this organization is public.

[ioquatix]

Suggested change

	@lines = true if options[:lines]
	@lines = !!options[:lines]

You will want to set or clear this every time to ensure that the state is handled correctly.

[ioquatix]

For covered, we also need to support:

::Coverage.result(stop: false, clear: true)

[oracle-contributor-agreement]

Thank you for signing the OCA.

[mtortonesi]

Dear @ioquatix, I changed the code as per your request.

Would be happy to help you with adding support for ::Coverage.result(stop: false, clear: true) but I need more information about it.

[ioquatix]

   def self.result(stop: true, clear: true)
     result = peek_result
     Truffle::Coverage.disable if stop || clear
     Truffle::Coverage.enable if !stop && clear

I believe something like this can work.. but it's just a guess.

[mtortonesi]

I took another look at this and fixed a couple of bugs in my code. Now everything seems to be fine:

Example video of sus+covered on Truffleruby

@ioquatix, I also added support for the stop and clear argument in Coverage#result, following your suggestions. However, I have no idea how to test that code properly.

[eregon]

Thank you for this this.
What would be super helpful is if you could write specs under spec/ruby/library/coverage for all the edge cases we found in #3150.

[eregon]

Having these specs is needed to ensure we implement working and compatible behavior + avoid regressions.
For instance we need specs for arguments and keywords arguments given to Coverage.start.

[andrykonchin]

I will add missing specs and prepare the PR to merging.

[eregon]

@mtortonesi Sorry it takes a while but as you can see it's a lot more complicated than the initial patch.
Ah and because this was a PR from your master, it might have been unintentionally closed as a side effect.

We'll merge the changes when they are ready, we have an internal PR with extra specs etc.

[eregon]

Fixed in #3389