[DO NOT review/merge it - just proposal] Separated config reading code from the rest logic

[cybay]

DISCLAIMER:
DO NOT Review it
DO NOT Merge it
Only for discussing.
Just proposal.

Statements/changes

1. graft-ng code should be located inside of graft::supernode namespace. Just because it IS graft supernode.
2. Object Server (and its parts, e.g. Config) is located in graft::supernode::server
3. Entity supernode now is called graft::supernode::Node. Its config is graft::supernode::Config
4. Each config has its own loader, e.g. graft::supernode::server::ConfigLoader and
   graft::supernode::ConfigLoader. It does load data from command-line + ini-file into appropriate structure.
5. ConfigOpts - renamed into graft::supernode::server::Config
6. ConfigOptsEx - renamed into graft::supernode::Config

Decomposition of RouterT

1. All related parts now located at graft::supernode::route
2. RouterT actually never been the thing that does make routing. It was just a container for routes. Hence now it's called RouteSet.
3. RouterT is not templated class any more. It was never needed.
4. RouterT::Root - this is really router. And now ti's called graft::supernode::route::Router.

[AlexanderSuprunenko]

Why do you need (void)? Is C somewhere assumed?

[cybay]

void is not related to C or C++. What the problem?

[jagerman]

It is most definitely related to C and is only even allowed in C++ because it needs to be compatible with C code. (But since this is a constructor it is especially pointless since C compatibility isn't even possible in the first place). See the C++ Core Guideline's strong recommendation against this.

[AlexanderSuprunenko]

Why not "bool testnet = false;" or ""bool testnet = {}" instead of "Config(void);" ?

[cybay]

Because I'd prefer use One way of initialization instead of two different ways.
And we can't always initialize all things inplace.