Create `AbstractPopMember`

[MilesCranmer]

@atharvas could you please review this as soon as you get a chance?

I did it from scratch and managed to get around the type instabilities. But I want to make sure it works for LaSR.

Look at test/test_abstract_popmember.jl for an example implementation. Basiclaly you need to implement create_child for one parent and two parents (crossover) as a way of propagating extra metadata forward. Or crossing over metadata in some way.

[github-actions[bot]]

Benchmark Results (Julia v1)

Time benchmarks

	master	000ed9408742fe...	master / 000ed9408742fe...
search/multithreading	14.5 ± 0.53 s	14.4 ± 0.36 s	1.01 ± 0.044
search/serial	32.2 ± 0.63 s	31.8 ± 1.1 s	1.01 ± 0.04
utils/best_of_sample	1.65 ± 0.37 μs	1.77 ± 0.39 μs	0.932 ± 0.29
utils/check_constraints_x10	16.9 ± 4.3 μs	16.8 ± 4.2 μs	1.01 ± 0.36
utils/compute_complexity_x10/Float64	2.14 ± 0.09 μs	2.16 ± 0.09 μs	0.991 ± 0.059
utils/compute_complexity_x10/Int64	2.04 ± 0.081 μs	2.06 ± 0.09 μs	0.99 ± 0.058
utils/compute_complexity_x10/nothing	1.53 ± 0.08 μs	1.55 ± 0.08 μs	0.987 ± 0.072
utils/insert_random_op_x10	5.1 ± 1.7 μs	5.24 ± 1.7 μs	0.973 ± 0.45
utils/next_generation_x100	0.431 ± 0.022 ms	0.446 ± 0.022 ms	0.967 ± 0.068
utils/optimize_constants_x10	0.0327 ± 0.0078 s	0.0333 ± 0.0078 s	0.98 ± 0.33
utils/randomly_rotate_tree_x10	7.83 ± 0.88 μs	7.99 ± 0.94 μs	0.979 ± 0.16
time_to_load	2.73 ± 0.034 s	2.6 ± 0.039 s	1.05 ± 0.02

Memory benchmarks

	master	000ed9408742fe...	master / 000ed9408742fe...
search/multithreading	0.203 G allocs: 52.9 GB	0.203 G allocs: 52.9 GB	1
search/serial	0.205 G allocs: 53.7 GB	0.205 G allocs: 53.7 GB	1
utils/best_of_sample	0.037 k allocs: 3.22 kB	0.037 k allocs: 3.22 kB	1
utils/check_constraints_x10	0.034 k allocs: 0.875 kB	0.034 k allocs: 0.875 kB	1
utils/compute_complexity_x10/Float64	0 allocs: 0 B	0 allocs: 0 B
utils/compute_complexity_x10/Int64	0 allocs: 0 B	0 allocs: 0 B
utils/compute_complexity_x10/nothing	0 allocs: 0 B	0 allocs: 0 B
utils/insert_random_op_x10	0.04 k allocs: 1.56 kB	0.041 k allocs: 1.62 kB	0.962
utils/next_generation_x100	4.62 k allocs: 0.276 MB	4.63 k allocs: 0.276 MB	0.998
utils/optimize_constants_x10	23.3 k allocs: 23.5 MB	24.1 k allocs: 25.5 MB	0.922
utils/randomly_rotate_tree_x10	0.042 k allocs: 1.81 kB	0.042 k allocs: 1.81 kB	1
time_to_load	0.151 k allocs: 11.5 kB	0.151 k allocs: 11.5 kB	1

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

:x: Patch coverage is 96.00000% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review. :white_check_mark: Project coverage is 94.89%. Comparing base (137db25) to head (2dc0645).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/SearchUtils.jl	81.81%	2 Missing :warning:
src/HallOfFame.jl	92.30%	1 Missing :warning:

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #505      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.89%   94.89%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files          42       42              
  Lines        3837     3876      +39     
==========================================
+ Hits         3641     3678      +37     
- Misses        196      198       +2     

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

:rocket: New features to boost your workflow:

• :snowflake: Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[atharvas]

Gosh. Looking at this now. I was on the wrong branch the whole time.

[atharvas]

@MilesCranmer LGTM. Needed one extra argument and there were a couple of minor errors with the test cases. Check out #515 that needs to first be merged into this branch. And then, if it passes the entire test suite (which it now does locally on my Linux machine), we can merge into main.