Fixing bug where sub-rule would not be considered new if its keys and…

[jonessha]

… patterns were contained in its sibling sub-rules, even if no sibling contained all of the keys and patterns by itself.

Description of changes:

Fixing bug where sub-rule would not be considered new if its keys and patterns were contained in its sibling sub-rules, even if no sibling contained all of the keys and patterns by itself. This would result in that sub-rule not being matchable. To avoid adversely affecting performance, this required adding a mapping of sub-rule name to IDs in SubRuleContext.Generator. While doing this, I also moved the mapping of sub-rule ID to name out of NameState and into SubRuleContext.Generator. For most cases, this will be a net memory improvement (despite the additional mapping), as there is a single SubRuleContext.Generator at the Machine level, where as there are many NameStates at the Machine level, so the ID to name mapping would be stored redundantly many times.

Benchmark / Performance (for source code changes):

EXACT events/sec: 207871.2
WILDCARD events/sec: 153728.7
PREFIX events/sec: 204479.8
PREFIX_EQUALS_IGNORE_CASE_RULES events/sec: 205465.8
SUFFIX events/sec: 200818.1
SUFFIX_EQUALS_IGNORE_CASE_RULES events/sec: 203503.3
EQUALS_IGNORE_CASE events/sec: 179652.6
NUMERIC events/sec: 119768.4
ANYTHING-BUT events/sec: 126150.4
ANYTHING-BUT-IGNORE-CASE events/sec: 122102.0
ANYTHING-BUT-PREFIX events/sec: 133167.5
ANYTHING-BUT-SUFFIX events/sec: 131038.1
COMPLEX_ARRAYS events/sec: 26159.4
PARTIAL_COMBO events/sec: 49355.6
COMBO events/sec: 16895.4

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.