Add primitive array setter optimization [Primitive Arrays Pt.4]

[Shibi-bala]

Before this PR

Add back optimization removed here: #2274 (comment)

This will allow clients to just track primitive arrays internally which will be a nice perf improvement.

After this PR

==COMMIT_MSG==
==COMMIT_MSG==

Possible downsides?

[changelog-app]

Generate changelog in changelog/@unreleased

What do the change types mean?

• feature: A new feature of the service.
• improvement: An incremental improvement in the functionality or operation of the service.
• fix: Remedies the incorrect behaviour of a component of the service in a backwards-compatible way.
• break: Has the potential to break consumers of this service's API, inclusive of both Palantir services
  and external consumers of the service's API (e.g. customer-written software or integrations).
• deprecation: Advertises the intention to remove service functionality without any change to the
  operation of the service itself.
• manualTask: Requires the possibility of manual intervention (running a script, eyeballing configuration,
  performing database surgery, ...) at the time of upgrade for it to succeed.
• migration: A fully automatic upgrade migration task with no engineer input required.

Note: only one type should be chosen.

How are new versions calculated?

• ❗The break and manual task changelog types will result in a major release!
• 🐛 The fix changelog type will result in a minor release in most cases, and a patch release version for patch branches. This behaviour is configurable in autorelease.
• ✨ All others will result in a minor version release.

Type

• Feature
• Improvement
• Fix
• Break
• Deprecation
• Manual task
• Migration

Description

Add primitive array setter optimization [Primitive Arrays Pt.4]

Check the box to generate changelog(s)

• Generate changelog entry

[Shibi-bala]

Oops don't know how I accidentally left the comment block down there :(

[Shibi-bala]

duplicated check from SafeLong. Not sure if its worth moving this to be public

[carterkozak]

I’m currently ooto, but as I mentioned in our last discussion, I don’t want to expand the generated types public api. We have gone to great lengths to avoid and remove code using arrays over well-encapsulated immutable types. Before examining this, it would be helpful to have examples with benchmarks of what we’re trying to resolve, as well as an analysis of the other options which might achieve the desired outcome.

[raiju]

@carterkozak I modified the methods to copy the array on input, which should protect our expectations around mutability. While it will cost some memory/speed, it's quite a bit more efficient than the boxed list version. Would this be ok to merge?