MultilineLambdaItParameter: don't report when lambda has no implicit parameter references

[t-kameyama]

Fixes #3570

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #3696 (01104e1) into main (9babc59) will increase coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 75.00%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #3696      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     78.00%   78.04%   +0.04%     
- Complexity     2870     2883      +13     
============================================
  Files           471      473       +2     
  Lines          9275     9302      +27     
  Branches       1766     1767       +1     
============================================
+ Hits           7235     7260      +25     
  Misses         1078     1078              
- Partials        962      964       +2     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
...h/detekt/rules/style/MultilineLambdaItParameter.kt	87.09% <75.00%> (-0.91%)	13.00 <5.00> (+4.00)	⬇️
.../detekt/rules/documentation/EndOfSentenceFormat.kt	95.23% <0.00%> (-0.77%)	12.00% <0.00%> (+2.00%)	⬇️
...h/detekt/rules/documentation/DeprecatedBlockTag.kt	93.75% <0.00%> (ø)	5.00% <0.00%> (?%)
...arturbosch/detekt/rules/documentation/KDocStyle.kt	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)	2.00% <0.00%> (?%)

---

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 9babc59...01104e1. Read the comment docs.

[picklebento]

Code coverage is reporting test coverage miss on https://app.codecov.io/gh/detekt/detekt/compare/3696/diff#D1L118. What scenario will it take to fail the condition getResolvedCall(bindingContext)?.resultingDescriptor == implicitParameter, is it by shadowing the it name with another local variable?

[t-kameyama]

Yes, I fixed the test. 01104e1