Rename Array, Dictionary and Variant.duplicate() to copy()

[madmiraal]

Does the same internally for Vector<>, which includes all PackedArray types.

Part of #16863.

Note: The original suggestion suggested either copy() or clone() and #16863 actually suggests clone(), but all the documentation uses the work "copy" in the descriptions; so I think it makes more sense to use copy().

[aaronfranke]

The problem with copy is that it's too imprecise of a word, it can be interpreted as copying a reference, while clone implies a brand new array with the same contents.

[madmiraal]

The problem with copy is that it's too imprecise of a word, it can be interpreted as copying a reference, while clone implies a brand new array with the same contents.

I think this is even more reason why copy is a better name for the methods. If you want to clone it i.e. copy the data too, you need to set the 'deep' parameter to true.

[madmiraal]

Rebased following 4ca1e73.

[madmiraal]

Rebased following merge of #46991 and #47166.

[madmiraal]

Updated documentation with --doctool ..

[madmiraal]

Rebased following 29775a1.

[akien-mga]

We discussed this in a PR review meeting today and the consensus was that we didn't see much value in the rename. duplicate() is quite explicit and matches language used in the editor too (Duplicate Node, Duplicate Resource, etc.).

As long as we're consistent in our own API, I think keeping duplicate() is fine.