Merge `conservation_rules` and `rule_priorities` attributes

[redeboer]

While investigating #272, I started to wonder why EdgeSettings and NodeSettings require conservation_rules as well as rule_priorities. Can't these two just be combined into one attribute of type dict[Rule, int]?

qrules/src/qrules/solving.py

Lines 44 to 50 in e60ff89

	@define
	class EdgeSettings:
	"""Solver settings for a specific edge of a graph."""
	conservation_rules: set[GraphElementRule] = field(factory=set)
	rule_priorities: dict[GraphElementRule, int] = field(factory=dict)
	qn_domains: dict[Any, list] = field(factory=dict)

[grayson-helmholz]

Aside from tests, Edge/NodeSettings is mainly used in settings.create_interaction_settings(...) but which is then heavily employed in the StateTransitionManager. Should this be in its own branch?

[redeboer]

Should this be in its own branch?

Yes as far as possible it is better to keep refactorings isolated and small

[redeboer]

Some idea after discussions: we could write something like:

conservation_rules:  dict[GraphElementRule, RulePriorities]

where RulePriorities is Annotated

[grayson-helmholz]

Rewriting get_rules_by_priority() with the new definitions of Edge|NodeSettings
causes an infinite-loop in tests/channels/test_y_to_d0_d0bar_pi0_pi0.py

[redeboer]

Funny, seems that the rule priorities never did anything from the start 😂

qrules/src/qrules/solving.py

Lines 539 to 541 in e60ff89

	(x, graph_element_settings.rule_priorities[type(x)]) # type: ignore[index]
	if type(x) in graph_element_settings.rule_priorities
	else (x, 1)

The keys are x, not type(x), so it always falls back to 1