Default to ismutable(array) = true #28
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks, good to know that you are OK with the change. After this is merged, can you release the package soon? I'd like to use it from JuliaFolds/BangBang.jl#48 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I propose to get rid of the default
ismutable(x::DataType) = x.mutable. An array type implemented with immutable struct does not mean the array is immutable (e.g., sparse arrays #27). Like wise, it is imaginable to implement semantically immutable array using mutable struct.So, I think it would be nice to have a sane and predictable default. Here, I suggest to treat arrays as mutable by default. This way, missing definition of
ismutableis an error, rather than a slow or incorrect computation.