feat: add iter/cuany

[RidamGarg]

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:
adds the implementation of @stdlib/iter/cuany

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request:

• resolves [RFC]: add @stdlib/iter/cuany [RFC]: add @stdlib/iter/cuany #2331

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

No.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

• Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.

---

@stdlib-js/reviewers

[kgryte]

@RidamGarg Would you mind updating your OP to use our PR template? You should have been prompted to use that template when opening the PR. That template includes a checkbox that you need to check in order to allow your contributions to be included in the project.

Also, it looks like CI is failing for your PR, so you'll want to address the lint and other errors before we perform a review. Thanks!

[kgryte]

Also, you're attempting to open a PR from your main branch. I suggest that moving forward you use a more descriptive name. For further info, see our contributing guide, which then links to our branching guide.

[RidamGarg]

Hello @kgryte , Thanks for pointing out the problems. Can I get The PR template as I am not able to find it now. For linting errors, I am able to solve them for all the other files. But not able to solve it for Readme.md file & repl.txt. Can you help me with that?

[kgryte]

PR template can be found here: https://github.com/stdlib-js/stdlib/blob/develop/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md

[kgryte]

For an example, see other PRs. E.g., #2443.

[RidamGarg]

Done @kgryte

[kgryte]

@RidamGarg It looks like you did not follow the suggestions left in #2358 (review). For all future PRs, you need to follow our branching guidance. Any future PRs which don't won't be reviewed or accepted, as failure to follow that guidance results in significantly more work for reviewers.

For this PR, I had to refactor the entirety of the implementation. Your prior approach simply consumed the entire source iterator, created a temporary array, and then returned a new iterator. You should ask, however, what happens if the source iterator has an infinite number of values?

Additionally, you'll want to adhere more closely to our conventions: style, language (e.g., descriptions), and prior art. We place a high value on consistency.

I've tested things locally, so I'll go ahead and merge. But any future PRs in which CI does not pass due to branching issues or lint errors will not be accepted.

[RidamGarg]

Okay @kgryte, I'll keep this in mind in the future. Sorry for the inconvenience caused.