fix(select): don't change form state when adding to a form

[cstephe]

• Remove code which causes side effect on form elements
• Add a delay to the initial render of a multiple select so that it doesn't set the element to dirty on initialization.

Fixes #11490

PR Checklist

Please check that your PR fulfills the following requirements:

• The commit message follows our guidelines
• Tests for the changes have been added or this is not a bug fix / enhancement
• Docs have been added, updated, or were not required

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

[x] Bugfix
[ ] Enhancement
[ ] Documentation content changes
[ ] Code style update (formatting, local variables)
[ ] Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
[ ] Build related changes
[ ] CI related changes
[ ] Infrastructure changes
[ ] Other... Please describe:

What is the current behavior?

Issue Number: #11490
The select/multiple has code it in which causes a side-effect on the containing form by explicitly setting the form state to pristine anytime one is added with a set model value. This errant code was introduced originally to try to fix an issue where during initialization the control thought it was being updated and would implicitly mark the form dirty. This is obviously a deal breaker when using this control in dynamic forms.

What is the new behavior?

Now the control initializes so that it does not think it is being updated and the "corrective" side-effect has been removed. Adding and removing these controls from a dynamic form no longer changes the form state.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

[ ] Yes
[x] No

Other information

[googlebot]

We found a Contributor License Agreement for you (the sender of this pull request), but were unable to find agreements for all the commit author(s) or Co-authors. If you authored these, maybe you used a different email address in the git commits than was used to sign the CLA (login here to double check)? If these were authored by someone else, then they will need to sign a CLA as well, and confirm that they're okay with these being contributed to Google.
In order to pass this check, please resolve this problem and have the pull request author add another comment and the bot will run again. If the bot doesn't comment, it means it doesn't think anything has changed.

[cstephe]

I already have a CLA, any help on resolving that check point?

[googlebot]

CLAs look good, thanks!

[Splaktar]

This looks reasonable to me at first glance. I had a few minor consistency and naming recommendations.

I was happy to see that this doesn't require major changes to any of the existing tests.

Thank you for the contribution!

Please make sure to amend your commit and force push it back up to your branch so that you can avoid needing to squash commits.

[cstephe]

@Splaktar I'm not sure if i'm supposed to resolve the conversations for the PR comments. I did one, then I thought, maybe thats for you to resolve.

[Splaktar]

LGTM. I'll send this to presubmit testing and hope that it doesn't run into any tests that depend on the old/broken behavior.

[Splaktar]

This appears to have caused the following regression: #11571