* Generalize Bool parse method to AbstractString

Fixes JuliaStrings/InlineStrings.jl#57.

We currently have a specialization for `parse(Bool, ::Union{String, SubString{String})`
where `true` and `false` are parsed appropriately. The restriction to
`Union{String, SubString{String}}`, however, means we don't get this behavior
for other `AbstractString`s. In the linked issue above, for InlineStrings, we end up
going through the generic integer parsing codepath which results in an `InexactError`
when we try to do `Bool(10)`.

The proposal in this PR takes advantage of the fact that there is only the 2 comparisons
where we do `_memcmp` that require the input string to be "dense" (in memory), and otherwise,
we just do a comparison against a `SubString` of the input string.

Relatedly, I've wanted to introduce the concept of an abstrac type like:

```julia
abstract type MemoryAddressableString <: AbstractString
```

where the additional required interface would be being able to call
`pointer(::MemoryAddressableString)`, since a lot of our string algorithms depend on doing
these kind of pointer operations and hence makes it quite a pain to implement your own
custom string type.

* Apply suggestions from code review

Co-authored-by: Stefan Karpinski <stefan@karpinski.org>
Co-authored-by: Nick Robinson <npr251@gmail.com>

Co-authored-by: Stefan Karpinski <stefan@karpinski.org>
Co-authored-by: Nick Robinson <npr251@gmail.com>
(cherry picked from commit 63830a6)

(cherry picked from commit c470dc3)

(cherry picked from commit 7e3c706)

(cherry picked from commit 236c23b)

(cherry picked from commit 28720ff)

(cherry picked from commit c43e5a1)

(cherry picked from commit 503d5b4)

fixes #50780 caused by #47013.

(cherry picked from commit 3e04129)

(cherry picked from commit 744aa79)

Update URLs to JuliaHub blog

(cherry picked from commit abae35c)

(cherry picked from commit 48c92c1)

Fixes the case from #50518, but we actually have two test cases in
the tests that also hit this (e.g. this one:
```
f40964(xs::Int...=1; k = 2) = (xs, k)
```), but just happened not to hit the bad codegen path. #50556,
once merged would have complained on those definitions as well,
without this fix.

(cherry picked from commit c272236)

(cherry picked from commit cb6d0f2)

…=false

only check that values are finite in `generic_lufact`  when `check=true`

(cherry picked from commit 824cdf1)

Fix #50125

(cherry picked from commit ef6d900)

The documentation of `Pkg.jl` is instructing
developers to rely on the existence of this function, and there doesn't
seem to be any alternative which is a part of the API that developers
can use instead on to guarantee forward compatibility for the same
behavior.

`Base.get_extension` is [referred to
explicitly](https://pkgdocs.julialang.org/v1.9/creating-packages/#Backwards-compatibility)
in the `Pkg.jl` docs to conditionally use package extensions vs
`Requires.jl`.

The `Pkg.jl` docs suggest
```julia
if !isdefined(Base, :get_extension)
  include("../ext/PlottingContourExt.jl")
end
```
to transition from "normal dependency to extension," which will break
and automatically load the extension in future versions should
`Base.get_extension` go away.

`Base.get_extension` is the only way (that I know of) to directly access
the module associated with a package extension, which can be a useful
utility as well.

(cherry picked from commit d1759bc)

(cherry picked from commit 462ac49)

Currently, `Array(r::AbstractRange)` falls back to `vcat(r)`, but
certain ranges may choose to specialize `vcat(r::AbstractRange)` to not
return an `Array`. This PR ensures that `Array(r)` always returns an
`Array`.

At present, there's some code overlap with `vcat` (just above the
`Array` method added in this PR). Perhaps some of these may be replaced
by `unsafe_copyto!`, but the tests for ranges include some special cases
that don't support `getindex`, which complicates things a bit. I've not
done this for now. In any case, the common bit of code is pretty simple,
so perhaps the duplication is harmless.

(cherry picked from commit 3cc0590)

Otherwise we may end up with the state of a dead thread, as the system
IDs can alias. This can lead to an early return from the exception
handler, resulting in e.g. safepoint exceptions being actually delivered
to user code.

---------

Co-authored-by: Jameson Nash <vtjnash@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Cody Tapscott <topolarity@tapscott.me>

This change simplifies the boundscheck in loop as LLVM would lift the const subtraction.
Simd block would be generated in more cases.

Co-authored-by: N5N3 <2642243996@qq.com>
(cherry picked from commit 1543cdd)