Fix Bottleneck when Handling Recursive Types

[seandstewart]

As part of the changes to handle recursive types, we added recursion detection. We re-worked it in the last version to minimize its impact. However, it was still significantly hampering performance at compile-time.

This resolves that bottleneck by removing the recursion check and adding awareness of "parent" types when resolving constraints and schemas.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #118 into master will decrease coverage by 0.23%.
The diff coverage is 87.91%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #118      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.69%   96.46%   -0.24%     
==========================================
  Files          36       36              
  Lines        3815     3842      +27     
==========================================
+ Hits         3689     3706      +17     
- Misses        126      136      +10     

Flag	Coverage Δ
#3.7	96.40% <87.64%> (-0.22%)	⬇️
#3.8	96.45% <87.91%> (-0.24%)	⬇️
#unittests	96.46% <87.91%> (-0.24%)	⬇️

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
typic/constraints/array.py	98.75% <ø> (ø)
typic/constraints/mapping.py	98.86% <ø> (-0.57%)	⬇️
typic/klass.py	100.00% <ø> (+2.32%)	⬆️
typic/util.py	94.09% <ø> (+0.78%)	⬆️
typic/ext/schema/schema.py	88.42% <78.72%> (-1.03%)	⬇️
typic/serde/resolver.py	92.10% <88.88%> (-0.72%)	⬇️
typic/constraints/common.py	92.83% <100.00%> (-2.93%)	⬇️
typic/constraints/factory.py	100.00% <100.00%> (+2.98%)	⬆️
typic/ext/schema/field.py	99.27% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
typic/serde/common.py	94.54% <100.00%> (-0.30%)	⬇️
... and 9 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6ab0ff0...02f0cc1. Read the comment docs.