Verify proveX and checkX functions similarly to testX

[palinatolmach]

Closes #247.

Currently, this PR adds an error that is thrown if any of the function names provided with --match-test do not start with test or testFail, but should be refactored.

At the moment, only functions starting with test and testFail are checked for Foundry success predicate and will fail if the function reverts. There are two issues with this approach:

• tests prefixed with test/testFail are picked up for fuzzing during a forge test run, and we don't provide a way to specify Kontrol-specific functions
• symbolic tests written for other tools (Halmos and hevm, in particular)

The changes introduced in this PR include:

• the ability to handle functions that start with prove and check prefixes similarly to those starting with test
• a simple tests for this new functionality: prove_assert_true(); this test is skipped in the legacy CI in order to not increase it's runtime and since the change is relatively minor

[palinatolmach]

As highlighted by @RaoulSchaffranek and @anvacaru, some of our use-cases such as the debugger and CSE require executing functions that do not start with test. In this case, we should probably make it clear that we're not checking for violations in the documentation and/or through a warning message to the user.

[palinatolmach]

Based on the discussion in today's standup, we decided to handle tests prefixed with prove and proveFail similarly to those starting with test. That would help us define Kontrol-specific functions that would not get executed during a forge test run and would also make Kontrol compatible with Halmos and hevm symbolic tests.

cc @JuanCoRo

[anvacaru]

Can you test this by renaming one of the existing tests (for which we check the output) with the new prefixes?

[palinatolmach]

Can you test this by renaming one of the existing tests (for which we check the output) with the new prefixes?

@anvacaru I renamed one of the tests for which we check expected output from AssertTest.testFail_assert_false() to AssertTest.checkFail_assert_false() in 51848f4. To avoid increasing the CI load, I removed testFail_assert_false, so there's only checkFail_assert_false now. I find it sufficient, since the change is rather small and we're checking similar functionality with other testFail tests. prove prefix is also checked in AssertTest.prove_assert_true(), though without the expected output check.

Please let me know if you think we should test it more exhaustively, and thank you for all the suggestions!