Alexander Plavin

I guess related to https://github.com/JuliaArrays/StructArrays.jl/pull/270#discussion_r1233080560. Surely pushing/appending arrays shouldn't depend on Tables, right? This risks inconsistencies between the regular array and Table interfaces, and here we see a real-life example....

Not to discourage adding such methods here, but: Assuming you are talking about functions `SplitApplyCombine.group` and `SplitApplyCombine.innerjoin`, try `FlexiGroups.jl` and `FlexiJoins.jl` respectively. They do better in preserving container types and...

Bump...

> Do other array libraries do this? That's a barrier for introducing any behavior in the first place, because at some point no packages do _\_ :) I think it...

bump...

bump...

Noticed interesting convergence, though arriving from quite a different direction. In `AccessorsExtra`, I define the `construct([T,] f1 => val1, f2 => val2, ...)` function to create an object with the...

`g(y)` is inverse to `f(x)` requires `g(f(x)) == x` for all `x`, and it seems only reasonable to require this from definitions in a generic package. You won't do `inverse(sin)...

That's a bugfix, so a regular release should be fine - without changing the major version.

> Also relates to https://github.com/JuliaMath/InverseFunctions.jl/issues/10. Yeah, a nice way to support those would be nice! Personally, I have multiple usecases for inverses, and some of them in principle require different...