JuliaArrays / JuliaArrays/StaticArrays.jl
Should MArray be backed by `Memory`?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Julia
- Stars
- 844
- Forks
- 159
- Avg merge
- 3d 21h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 3
Description
Now that we have Memory, would it make more sense to use that than a mutable struct with a tuple? The current MArray is limited in it's ability to mutate element types that are not straightforward isbitstype and I think that both Memory and MArray only get special allocations if they fit within Julia's GC pool sizes.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by comparing the current mutable-struct-and-tuple implementation of MArray with Julia's Memory type and the cited Julia GC pool sizes. Investigate the reported mutation limitations for non-isbitstype element types and determine whether backing MArray with Memory is appropriate; done means reaching and documenting a resolved design decision.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- julia
- Domain
- performance
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100