fix(rome_js_analyze): useShorthandArrayType should handle nested ReadonlyArray and not report to TsObjectType

[unvalley]

Summary

Closes #4349 #4361

This pr adds modification for nested ReadonlyArray (#4349 ) and reduce false positive (#4361 ).
Currently, our useShorthandArrayType follows typescript-eslint/array-type (array-simple option).

And the rule should not report TsObjectType in a type Array or ReadonlyArray.

Example

// issue 4349
type Before = ReadonlyArray<ReadonlyArray<T>>
type After = readonly (readonly T[])[]

// issue 4361
type AcceptedObjectType = Array<{x: string, y: string}>

Test Plan

cargo test -p rome_js_analyze -- use_shorthand_array_type

Changelog

• [ ] The PR requires a changelog line

Documentation

• [ ] The PR requires documentation
• [ ] I will create a new PR to update the documentation
  I updated lint rule doc a bit (describes typescript-eslint rule equivalent).

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for docs-rometools ready!

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	fff746c
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/docs-rometools/deploys/643512788f694a0008c959f7
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-4354--docs-rometools.netlify.app/playground
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

[jpike88]

This rule is not behaving the same as the eslint equivalent. If I enable the Rome rule, my codebase lights up light xmas tree with loads of false positives.

Eslint rule below:

'@typescript-eslint/array-type': [
			'error',
			{
				default: 'array-simple',
			},
		],

See below screenshot from eslint typescript playground with the above rule enabled, correctly identifying the bottom example only. Rome would treat both examples as violating the rule.

[unvalley]

Thank you, @jpike88. I have fixed the issue at f20fa12. Our next step should be to create test cases for typescript-eslint/array-type/array-simple properly if current test cases are not enough. This will require another PR.

[jpike88]

got it ill make seperate issue

[ematipico]

@unvalley this PR requires a changelog line, could you please add it?

[unvalley]

@ematipico I updated it.