wrap was introduced as the safe alternative to unsafe_wrap in #52049 in December by @MasonProtter.

Maybe this is the right call but I want to at least flag the issue. wrap a very a generic name and there are many packages using it for all kinds of purposes, and many others that will likely want to choose that name in the future. 288 files on GitHub define wrap, with some duplicates.

Options:

• No change. Users will qualify Package.wrap instead of using packages. Many people who would write a function wrap will probably decide to choose a different name for their function. Heavy users of Base.wrap will be pleased.
• Don't export wrap. Users will write Base.wrap instead of wrap, which could be annoying if it's in common usage, but will be more pleasant for authors and users of other functions named wrap.
• Rename it. wrap_memory? Array? array? memoryarray? something else?