Implement performant Start/End progress for Path using BBH

[EVAST9919]

Depends on:

• Improve Path vertex distribution by merging segments within the same line #6603 (not really, I just started to build on top of that, actual diff is half the size)
• Implement Bounding Box Hierarchy in Path #6630

This pr is basically plug'n'play (all use cases are preserved), so even without proper osu-side integration of new start/end progress methods everything will work as expected (though with the additional cost of tree creation).

osu-side diff to enable new performant start/end progress

--- a/osu.Game.Rulesets.Osu/Skinning/SnakingSliderBody.cs
+++ b/osu.Game.Rulesets.Osu/Skinning/SnakingSliderBody.cs
@@ -150,8 +150,9 @@ private void setRange(double p0, double p1)
-          drawableSlider.HitObject.Path.GetPathToProgress(CurrentCurve, p0, p1);
-
-            SetVertices(CurrentCurve);
+           Path.StartProgress = (float)p0;
+           Path.EndProgress = (float)p1;

Start/End progress

To create a sub-path starting at progress we will do the following:

1. Undo previous changes to the tree (if any were made)
2. Find a first node at which path distance will be less than progress*total path distance
3. Modify its start point and save it's index (to be able to undo changes in step 1 on a new progress value set)
4. Go up the tree computing the new bounds without nodes from the left

For end progress we are doing the same but from the right side.
This approach has additional benefit - we can copy all the segments of the path to the DrawNode once (after tree creation), and only change the range of segments to be drawn (replacing first and last segment to modified ones).

Path.SetStartProgress benchmark

pr:

Method	Mean	Error	StdDev	Allocated
SetStartProgressBBH100	161.0 ns	0.43 ns	0.40 ns	-
SetStartProgressBBH1000	307.0 ns	0.98 ns	0.91 ns	-
SetStartProgressBBH10000	549.4 ns	0.57 ns	0.48 ns	-
SetStartProgressBBH100000	774.0 ns	1.40 ns	1.31 ns	-
SetStartProgressBBH1000000	1,303.3 ns	2.06 ns	1.93 ns	-

[peppy]

@EVAST9919 did you happen to benchmark against existing code under similar scenarios?

[EVAST9919]

@EVAST9919 did you happen to benchmark against existing code under similar scenarios?

Good idea to compare overall time of arbitrary path creation, will do that

[EVAST9919]

@EVAST9919 did you happen to benchmark against existing code under similar scenarios?

I've updated the pr description to include that.

[EVAST9919]

With more and more changes in #6630 it would be easier to make a new pr instead of fixing all the conflicts, so I'll mark this one as a draft to use as a reference for an updated pr after #6630 merge.