Require ArrayInterfaceStaticArrays to fix downstream

[ChrisRackauckas]

No description provided.

[ChrisRackauckas]

@oschulz this is a bit of a tragedy. But there's a test that shows it's necessary, because of how this is implemented:

@generated function ArrayInterfaceCore.ismutable(::Type{<:ArrayPartition{T,S}}) where {T,S}
    res = all(ArrayInterfaceCore.ismutable, S.parameters)
    return :( $res )
end

which needs the dispatch for static arrays already defined for this to be resolved correctly, since it doesn't check the back edges.

[oschulz]

I guess that brings us back to the question "what would we need in a StaticArraysCore"?

[oschulz]

which needs the dispatch for static arrays already defined

Sorry, I don't see it right now - which specialization is the critical one?

[ChrisRackauckas]

Once again, this would only need SArray in there to know to mark it as ismutable false. So, the same little subset, nothing changed.

[ChrisRackauckas]

Sorry, I don't see it right now - which specialization is the critical one?

ArrayInterfaceCore.ismutable(::Type{<:SArray}) = false is all.

[ChrisRackauckas]

IMO, first push to Base should probably be to get that concept in Base. I don't know how people could write code without, it's insane that it still doesn't exist.

[oschulz]

Can't we just ask StaticArrays.jl to depend on ArrayInterfaceCore.jl and define it? :-)

[oschulz]

ArrayInterfaceCore.jl is so light now, so it would seem natural to define

ArrayInterfaceCore.ismutable(::Type{<:SArray}) = false

in StaticArrays.jl, right?