add BorderArray

[jw3126]

#98

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #99 into master will increase coverage by 0.32%.
The diff coverage is 90.24%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #99      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   81.12%   81.44%   +0.32%     
==========================================
  Files           8        9       +1     
  Lines        1118     1159      +41     
==========================================
+ Hits          907      944      +37     
- Misses        211      215       +4

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/ImageFiltering.jl	80% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
src/borderarray.jl	90.24% <90.24%> (ø)

---

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 3438a0c...e85d0bd. Read the comment docs.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #99 into master will increase coverage by 0.3%.
The diff coverage is 88.15%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master      #99     +/-   ##
=========================================
+ Coverage   81.12%   81.43%   +0.3%     
=========================================
  Files           8        9      +1     
  Lines        1118     1174     +56     
=========================================
+ Hits          907      956     +49     
- Misses        211      218      +7

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/ImageFiltering.jl	80% <ø> (ø)	⬆️
src/border.jl	80.76% <77.77%> (-1.87%)	⬇️
src/borderarray.jl	89.55% <89.55%> (ø)
src/mapwindow.jl	78.3% <0%> (+0.52%)	⬆️

---

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 3438a0c...15187a0. Read the comment docs.

[jw3126]

@timholy what do you think about the general design of BorderArray?

• I did not implement setindex! since it would be mutating border + inner points simultaneously
• What should happen with padarray? Should it stay as is? Should it return a BorderArray? Should it be removed? Personally I think it could be return a BorderArray and the current padarray should be spelled something like full(padarray(...)) instead.

[timholy]

This looks superficially awesome, but I haven't had bandwidth recently. Maybe I can review this tomorrow, sorry for the delay.

[timholy]

Very nice, as usual! Only very minor points here.

The implementation of getindex via constructing the CartesianIndex is a bit unconventional, but here it makes sense. Some day we may want to allow different border types along different dimensions (see #94), in which case we'll need an index-by-index implementation, but that's not really your problem here.

[timholy]

Once this passes tests, I approve merging. Thanks for this, fantastic work!

[jw3126]

@timholy can we tag a new release?

[timholy]

Sorry I didn't notice the question about tagging. Absolutely! There's nothing breaking here, right? So this could be 0.6.1?

I think you should be able tag yourself, if you like. Perhaps give it a try, just so we know whether you are as empowered as you deserve to be.

[jw3126]

Yeah, there is no breaking change, at least no intended one 😄. I will see if I can create a release.