Rewrite lexer and parser

[Schamper]

Closes #85, partially #142, and will make #86 and #138 a lot easier to implement.

This PR will (finally) replace the shoddy C syntax parser I originally wrote many moons ago, when I discovered the existence of re.Scanner and ran with it. This PR aims to add a somewhat decent lexer and separate parser. I'm still not a compsci 1337coder, so this is just what I came up with (with some help) and definitely not a textbook implementation. All feedback is welcome.

• New lexer
• New C syntax parser that utilizes the new lexer
• Expression parser re-uses the new lexer
• Reworked how sizeof works in the expression parser, and added offsetof

The new parser has made changing parsing behavior a lot easier. As such, this PR already makes the following changes:

• The new parser is slightly stricter, requiring proper semicolon endings for example. We'll need to fix this in any dissect code that has this.

• An important semantic change is how named nested structures are handled. In my infinite wisdom, I originally figured that named nested structures do not "exist" in the top level scope. That's not true, so now named nested structures get properly registered with the cstruct instance:

struct a {
    struct b {
        ...
    };
};

// Will register both `a` and `b`

• Another important change is how we deal with struct { ... } name;. We used to parse this first as an anonymous struct, then capture name as the structure type name. That's not strictly correct, name is a variable of an anonymous unnamed struct, so we now treat it as such. We don't error on this, but rather we silently ignore name and skip until we reach a ;
• typedef enum ... is now allowed
• Probably some other things I'm forgetting

This probably warrants a major version bump, so maybe good to pair this with #114, #144 and what we discussed in #142.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 740 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 0.00%. Comparing base (0e27409) to head (5f43faa).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
dissect/cstruct/lexer.py	0.00%	354 Missing ⚠️
dissect/cstruct/parser.py	0.00%	275 Missing ⚠️
dissect/cstruct/expression.py	0.00%	95 Missing ⚠️
dissect/cstruct/utils.py	0.00%	12 Missing ⚠️
dissect/cstruct/cstruct.py	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️
dissect/cstruct/exceptions.py	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##            main    #146   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage   0.00%   0.00%           
=====================================
  Files         21      22    +1     
  Lines       2435    2526   +91     
=====================================
- Misses      2435    2526   +91     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 32.62%

⚡ 3 improved benchmarks
❌ 1 regressed benchmark
✅ 8 untouched benchmarks
🆕 2 new benchmarks

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
⚡	test_benchmark_expression_parse_and_evaluate	393.3 µs	270 µs	+45.68%
❌	test_benchmark_expression_evaluate	82.2 µs	122 µs	-32.62%
⚡	test_benchmark_expression_parse	347.5 µs	192.3 µs	+80.7%
🆕	test_benchmark_parser	N/A	10.7 ms	N/A
⚡	test_benchmark_lexer_and_parser	15.7 ms	12.2 ms	+28.8%
🆕	test_benchmark_lexer	N/A	1.5 ms	N/A

---

_{Comparing rewrite-parser (5f43faa) with main (0e27409)}

[Schamper]

@sMezaOrellana would be interested in your thoughts on these changes!