internal: reorder ParsedNodeKind for range checks

[bung87]

Summary

Reorder ParsedNodeKind for range checks, and added named sets to
support querying parsed node kinds.

Details

Reorder ParsedNodeKind in order to support ranges over similar kinds.
This is considered experimental as the motivation for the reodering came
from usage in suggest (a consumer). The ordering should be determined
by the parser (the producer). Creating these seemingly convenient
consumer/read side ranges end up quietly coupling the producer and
consumer(s). Which results in refactorings to a small collection of
parser modules spilling out to changes in various consumer locations. In
this case these might coincide with the parser's needs, as well.

Additionally, added pnkDeclarativeDefs and pnkRoutineDefs similar to
PNode's kind, TNodeKind.

[saem]

I'm trying to understand the reasoning for the movement, or put another way, what are the group principles being applied to come up with the new ordering.

the type section I can sort of understand (guessing), but I'm struggling to come up with the reasons for the const def move, especially when taking ident def into account. The important part isn't whether identdef should move or not, but what are the rules/principles we should be following so we can make sure things are consistent.

[saem]

Generally speaking, I'm not a huge fan of reordering the enum based on the needs of a consumer, the order needs to be producer centric as the primary need is parsing.

Creating these seemingly convenient consumer/read side ranges end up quietly coupling the producer and consumer(s). Which results in refactorings to a a small collection of parser modules spilling out to changes in various consumer locations.

Consumers are better off using provided or created named sets for their querying need. I'm ok with this change going through because it doesn't trouble the parser yet, but this is something to be mindful of going forward.

[saem]

Updating the PR title and body.

If I have further questions, i'll ping @bung87 in chat.

[saem]

/merge

[github-actions]

Merge requested by: @saem

Contents after the first section break of the PR description has been removed and preserved below:

---

Notes for Reviewers

part of #879