feat(cheats): preserve struct order when parsing JSON objects

[0xrusowsky]

Motivation

Historical limitation in vm.parseJson where JSON object fields had to be sorted alphabetically, breaking compatibility with Solidity struct field order. This required developers to work around the limitation by manually ordering JSON fields.

Solution

Integrate Solar's compiler output into the multi-runners. The PR introduces a CheatcodeAnalysis architecture that provides the cheatcode inspector access to Solar's compiler output, enabling order-preserving JSON parsing.

JSON cheats improvements

• parseJson and parseJsonType now use struct definitions to preserve field order
• fallback to alphabetical ordering when unavailable (backwards compatible)

CheatcodeAnalysis Architecture

New CheatcodeAnalysis struct that provides cached, on-demand access to Solar's compiler output:

pub struct CheatcodeAnalysis {
    pub compiler: Arc<Compiler>,
    struct_defs: OnceLock<Result<StructDefinitions, AnalysisError>>,
}

the impl aims to be:

• easily extensible by only having to modify the CheatcodeAnalysis struct with the new fields and getter methods
• performant thanks to the lazy (on-demand) evaluation + caching

integrating a new analysis tool only requires setting up a new getter method (besides its impl):

/// Lazily initializes and returns the struct definitions.
pub fn struct_defs(&self) -> Result<&StructDefinitions, &AnalysisError> {
    self.struct_defs
        .get_or_init(|| {
            self.compiler.enter(|compiler| {
                let gcx = compiler.gcx();

                StructDefinitionResolver::new(gcx).process()
            })
        })
        .as_ref()
}

note: StructDefinitionResolver is a HIR visitor

---

old disc:

• feat(cheats): preserve struct order when parsing JSON objects #11069

stale

[DaniPopes]

please revert, this looks unrelated

[0xrusowsky]

i manually reverted my ConfigAndProject struct thingy, hence the diff.

will leave untouched 🤝

[DaniPopes]

this is a bit hard to follow, can you rewrite with a single for loop, also combining this second iter here?