[red-knot] Property tests (#14178)
## Summary
This PR adds a new `property_tests` module with quickcheck-based tests
that verify certain properties of types. The following properties are
currently checked:
* `is_equivalent_to`:
* is reflexive: `T` is equivalent to itself
* `is_subtype_of`:
* is reflexive: `T` is a subtype of `T`
* is antisymmetric: if `S <: T` and `T <: S`, then `S` is equivalent to
`T`
* is transitive: `S <: T` & `T <: U` => `S <: U`
* `is_disjoint_from`:
* is irreflexive: `T` is not disjoint from `T`
* is symmetric: `S` disjoint from `T` => `T` disjoint from `S`
* `is_assignable_to`:
* is reflexive
* `negate`:
* is an involution: `T.negate().negate()` is equivalent to `T`
There are also some tests that validate higher-level properties like:
* `S <: T` implies that `S` is not disjoint from `T`
* `S <: T` implies that `S` is assignable to `T`
* A singleton type must also be single-valued
These tests found a few bugs so far:
- #14177
- #14195
- #14196
- #14210
- #14731
Some additional notes:
- Quickcheck-based property tests are non-deterministic and finding
counter-examples might take an arbitrary long time. This makes them bad
candidates for running in CI (for every PR). We can think of running
them in a cron-job way from time to time, similar to fuzzing. But for
now, it's only possible to run them locally (see instructions in source
code).
- Some tests currently find false positive "counterexamples" because our
understanding of equivalence of types is not yet complete. We do not
understand that `int | str` is the same as `str | int`, for example.
These tests are in a separate `property_tests::flaky` module.
- Properties can not be formulated in every way possible, due to the
fact that `is_disjoint_from` and `is_subtype_of` can produce false
negative answers.
- The current shrinking implementation is very naive, which leads to
counterexamples that are very long (`str & Any & ~tuple[Any] &
~tuple[Unknown] & ~Literal[""] & ~Literal["a"] | str & int & ~tuple[Any]
& ~tuple[Unknown]`), requiring the developer to simplify manually. It
has not been a major issue so far, but there is a comment in the code
how this can be improved.
- The tests are currently implemented using a macro. This is a single
commit on top which can easily be reverted, if we prefer the plain code
instead. With the macro:
```rs
// `S <: T` implies that `S` can be assigned to `T`.
type_property_test!(
subtype_of_implies_assignable_to, db,
forall types s, t. s.is_subtype_of(db, t) => s.is_assignable_to(db, t)
);
```
without the macro:
```rs
/// `S <: T` implies that `S` can be assigned to `T`.
#[quickcheck]
fn subtype_of_implies_assignable_to(s: Ty, t: Ty) -> bool {
let db = get_cached_db();
let s = s.into_type(&db);
let t = t.into_type(&db);
!s.is_subtype_of(&*db, t) || s.is_assignable_to(&*db, t)
}
```
## Test Plan
```bash
while cargo test --release -p red_knot_python_semantic --features property_tests types::property_tests; do :; done
```
