Fix regression generating configuration

[BraisGabin]

This is not my nicest job for sure. But now it works and we have a test to ensure that it doesn't break again.

To fix this properly we need to do a huge refactor on the core.

fix #4601

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #4646 (ddd6ade) into main (481b3b2) will increase coverage by 84.53%.
The diff coverage is 71.42%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4646       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage        0   84.53%   +84.53%     
- Complexity      0     3364     +3364     
===========================================
  Files           0      482      +482     
  Lines           0    11211    +11211     
  Branches        0     2044     +2044     
===========================================
+ Hits            0     9477     +9477     
- Misses          0      698      +698     
- Partials        0     1036     +1036     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...otlin/io/gitlab/arturbosch/detekt/cli/CliRunner.kt	7.14% <0.00%> (ø)
...bosch/detekt/core/tooling/DefaultConfigProvider.kt	80.95% <50.00%> (ø)
...rturbosch/detekt/core/settings/ClassloaderAware.kt	63.63% <66.66%> (ø)
...ab/arturbosch/detekt/cli/runners/ConfigExporter.kt	84.61% <85.71%> (ø)
...itlab/arturbosch/detekt/core/ProcessingSettings.kt	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...detekt/tooling/api/DefaultConfigurationProvider.kt	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...kt/core/config/DefaultPropertiesConfigValidator.kt	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...bosch/detekt/rules/style/UnnecessaryInheritance.kt	92.85% <0.00%> (ø)
...ekt/generator/collection/DocumentationCollector.kt	86.36% <0.00%> (ø)
...rturbosch/detekt/rules/bugs/UnusedUnaryOperator.kt	70.83% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 478 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 481b3b2...ddd6ade. Read the comment docs.

[BraisGabin]

This functions were introduced in 1.20 so it's safe to change them.

[cortinico]

Could you provide some tests + more context on what this change is doing (it's not immediate from reading the code).

[BraisGabin]

ddd6ade#diff-ea3a27e29a40bcb62f6014e51bfdf793236b1ed156b98170570086a1cff78415 this is the unit test that I added to reproduce the issue. The test wasn't testing the real state. The real state is that the file doesn't exist and that all works. That case was failing before and know it works.

All the fix is in this commit: ddd6ade the other commits are just refactors to make this change easier. I don't know how to add more tests because the tests are already there.

---

About context. The issue was this line of code that I added in #4315:

detekt/detekt-cli/src/main/kotlin/io/gitlab/arturbosch/detekt/cli/runners/ConfigExporter.kt

Line 16 in 481b3b2

val spec = arguments.createSpec(outputPrinter, errorPrinter)

The problem is that arguments.createSpec validates that the configuration is ready to execute detekt. One of those checks is: If there is a configuration file path it should exist. But when you are generating the configuration the file doesn't need to exist. For that reason I can't use arguments.createSpec. That's the reason I'm using the Spec DSL directly. (Yeap, we have a DSL for that, Artur did so many things :P)

[cortinico]

Thanks for the explanation. IMHO this can be merged 👍