feat(template_lib)!: new access rules macro

[mrnaveira]

Description

• Created a new rule! macro in tari_template_lib to build AccessRule enums
• Updated all usages of access rules construction to use the new macro, including builtin templates (e.g. account and account_nft)

Motivation and Context

We want a better way of constructing AccessRules. For example, to restrict a resource to be minted only by a specific component, we need something like:

ResourceBuilder::fungible()
                .mintable(AccessRule::Restricted(RestrictedAccessRule::Require(
                    RequireRule::Require(address.into()),
                )))

Instead, we want a new macro that allows us to build access rules in simpler and more readable way:

ResourceBuilder::fungible()
                .mintable(rule!(component(address)))

This PR adds a new macro rule! for this purpose. All variants of rules can be build as follows:

• rule!(allow_all)
• rule!(deny_all)
• rule!(component(address))
• rule!(resource(address))
• rule!(template(address))
• rule!(non_fungible(address))
• rule!(any_of(component(c_address)), template(t_address)))

How Has This Been Tested?

• New unit test that covers all possible outputs of the new macro
• Existing templates (e.g. account) now use the new macro and all the related tests still pass

What process can a PR reviewer use to test or verify this change?

See previous section

Breaking Changes

• None
• Requires data directory to be deleted
• Other - As the tari_template_lib crate changes, all the builtin templates (e.g. account) also change.

[github-actions]

Test Results (CI)

571 tests  +1   570 ✅ +1   3h 15m 47s ⏱️ - 2m 28s
 64 suites ±0     0 💤 ±0 
  2 files   ±0     1 ❌ ±0 

For more details on these failures, see this check.

Results for commit 352baae. ± Comparison against base commit 39c638b.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[sdbondi]

Nice utACK