Dynamic array index assignment

[Protryon]

This PR adds input-indexed array assignment. It covers all arrays and indirect usage of arrays (i.e. myArray[i].1 = X). It does NOT cover input-indexed slice assignment (should be done in another PR).

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1007 (5cd05d7) into master (c67ef6a) will decrease coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 58.48%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1007      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   75.35%   75.35%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         435      438       +3     
  Lines       17567    17586      +19     
==========================================
+ Hits        13238    13252      +14     
- Misses       4329     4334       +5     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
compiler/src/expression/array/access.rs	22.31% <0.00%> (-0.77%)	⬇️
...piler/src/statement/assign/assignee/array_index.rs	29.54% <29.54%> (ø)
compiler/src/statement/assign/assignee/member.rs	60.00% <60.00%> (ø)
...src/statement/assign/assignee/array_range_index.rs	60.37% <60.37%> (ø)
compiler/src/statement/assign/assignee/tuple.rs	61.53% <61.53%> (ø)
compiler/src/function/mut_target.rs	57.14% <62.50%> (+24.88%)	⬆️
compiler/src/statement/assign/assignee/mod.rs	89.36% <89.36%> (ø)
asg/src/statement/assign.rs	72.78% <100.00%> (ø)
ast/src/reducer/canonicalization.rs	72.87% <100.00%> (ø)
ast/src/reducer/reconstructing_reducer.rs	85.93% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 12 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update c67ef6a...5cd05d7. Read the comment docs.

[damirka]

@Protryon I have run this branch over code sample from #935. It runs build and setup successfully, but proof is invalid.

 Verifying Starting...
 Verifying Proof is invalid
      Done Finished in 71 milliseconds 

[damirka]

Looks good. Solves the issue.

[acoglio]

Looks good. Is the proof invalid issue brought up by @damirka solved by the later 'bound check' commit?

[Protryon]

Looks good. Is the proof invalid issue brought up by @damirka solved by the later 'bound check' commit?

No, we confirmed that the case of indexing directly on input is fine, but the ternary causes proof failure and I haven't figured out why.

[collinc97]

Thank you for implementing @Protryon

The new assignee resolver looks great and is leaps and bounds better than the previous approach.

Codecov is detecting a lot of uncovered lines in array_index.rs and array_range_index.rs does this PR have tests to address all cases in those methods?