[JENKINS-75361] Consider Closure.resolveStrategy to reduce false positives

[dwnusbaum]

A user comment in JENKINS-75361 that has since been edited away, but is summarized in my comment, mentioned that #994 causes false positives for a relatively common pattern where assignments in closures are used as a DSL for building a map.

This PR adjusts the logic from that PR to consider Closure.resolveStrategy to try to reduce false positives a bit.

Testing done

See new automated test.

Submitter checklist

• Make sure you are opening from a topic/feature/bugfix branch (right side) and not your main branch!
• Ensure that the pull request title represents the desired changelog entry
• Please describe what you did
• Link to relevant issues in GitHub or Jira
• Link to relevant pull requests, esp. upstream and downstream changes
• Ensure you have provided tests - that demonstrates feature works or fixes the issue

[jglick]

Nobody should use this idiom, but yeah if you did, this would give false positives.

[dwnusbaum]

Nobody should use this idiom

Yes, but I have seen it so many times in support bundles that it seemed worth fixing.

[zbynek]

Nobody should use this idiom,

But isn't it used in all declarative pipelines because of https://github.com/jenkinsci/pipeline-model-definition-plugin/blob/a423189a7dff591fcd7ab6ed5290093f104a9e84/pipeline-model-definition/src/main/resources/org/jenkinsci/plugins/pipeline/modeldefinition/ModelInterpreter.groovy#L137 ?

We're not using anything like

body.resolveStrategy = Closure.DELEGATE_FIRST
body.delegate = map

in Jenkinsflie or pipeline library, yet I could reproduce the issue before this PR was released.

[jglick]

isn't it used in all declarative pipelines

Right, I meant use it directly.

I had thought that #995 handled the false positives from Declarative, but if this was also required, then great.