refactor: Unflatten selectors and convert to TypeScript

[MajorLift]

Motivation

Converting selectors to TypeScript is strictly speaking out-of-scope for this epic, but I decided to undertake it for these reasons:

• Enables formal validation of the "unflattening" refactors, which are too extensive for completely reliable verification by human reviewers.
• Large degree of overlap in workload.
• Typing blockers resolved now that we can take full advantage of heterogeneously-typed selector composition.

Description

• TypeScript conversions for files that contain selectors which directly or indirectly (i.e. via nested selectors) reference the metamask slice.
• Wherever practical, redefine selectors that take a state parameter to use create{,DeepEqual}Selector instead.
  • Replace explicit state type assignment with type dynamically derived from selector composition.
• Type fixes e.g. consistent typing for parameters passed through multiple levels and branches of nested selectors.

Notes

• The motivating changes are located in ui/selectors, ui/ducks, ui/helpers/utils, shared/modules/selectors.
• This commit is a good starting point for review: 9c931d8?w=1#diff-fc57d736577d4f0d4904397b8f14d9294198122f9805eba704af344bed525f2a
  • These diffs are not visible in the "Files changed" tab, because GitHub refuses to recognize these TypeScript conversions as renames.
• (investigating) This PR increases the circular dependencies count in ui/selectors (excluding type imports) from 5 to 33.

Related issues

• Closes [Unflattening #3] Unflatten Selectors #29604
• 3 of 7 PRs that will close EPIC: Unflatten metamask Redux slice #29600
• Regarding heterogeneously-typed selector composition, see: chore: Bump reselect to ^5.1.1 for heterogeneously-typed selectors support #29094
• Regarding circular dependencies, see: https://github.com/MetaMask/MetaMask-planning/issues/3849

Manual testing steps

Screenshots/Recordings

Before

After

Pre-merge author checklist

• I've followed MetaMask Contributor Docs and MetaMask Extension Coding Standards.
• I've completed the PR template to the best of my ability
• I’ve included tests if applicable
• I’ve documented my code using JSDoc format if applicable
• I’ve applied the right labels on the PR (see labeling guidelines). Not required for external contributors.

Pre-merge reviewer checklist

• I've manually tested the PR (e.g. pull and build branch, run the app, test code being changed).
• I confirm that this PR addresses all acceptance criteria described in the ticket it closes and includes the necessary testing evidence such as recordings and or screenshots.

[github-actions]

CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes.