lib/meta: optimise platform constraint algebra

[adisbladis]

• Inheriting into scope for fewer lookups
• Moving variables up in scope for memoisation
• Remove let scoping from evalConstraints
• Rename logical condition arguments to constraints/constraint
  Minor, but value confused me a bit.
• Add NONE/ANY from lib/meta: add platform constraints algebra (adisbladis alternative) NixOS/nixpkgs#348281

What was tested

• Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
• ...

If you (yes, you!) use the component(s) changed in this PR, please test the component(s) built from this PR and report your findings.

How can reviewers test this?

If you are a user and have a simple setup for the component(s) changed by this PR which others could use to this PR, please reply and share it with us.

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
  • sandbox = relaxed
  • sandbox = true
• 24.11 Release Notes (or backporting 23.11 and 24.05 Release notes)
  • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
  • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

---

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

[Atemu]

Thank you so much for looking into this in detail again!

I assume you profiled this as you went, could you share some benchmarks?

I must also admit that I had a few more changes that I had intended to push but forgot to. It's not much but it will cause a conflict.

I will push them and ask you to please take a look at them and rebase, reverting where you think/test your version to be better. I particularly like my implementation for ANY and NONE more.