ban: Refactor and add new option format

[ajafff]

PR checklist

• Addresses an existing issue: [ban] Optional explanation for banned globals #1940, Add nested accessors under the ban rule? #2821
• New feature, bugfix, or enhancement
  • Includes tests
• Documentation update

Overview of change:

Refactor and simplify banRule.
[enhancement] ban new options format: allows to specify an optional explanation message for function bans, banning nested methods and using a wildcard for object of a method ban
Fixes: #1940
Fixes: #2821

Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?

This removes some ancient rather unintentional behavior, where banning foo.bar() would also ban obj.foo.bar() and even fn().foo.bar().
I looked through the git history and PRs for the rule and it seems adding this "feature" was unintended.

CHANGELOG.md entry:

[nchen63]

add test for message in object

[nchen63]

handle arg.length == 0

[nchen63]

"fucus" -> "focus"?

[nchen63]

what if someone actually wanted to ban obj.foo.bar()?

[ajafff]

what if someone actually wanted to ban obj.foo.bar()?

That's really prone to errors, because it would also ban obj2.foo.bar() which may not be the desired behavior. Maybe we could extend the config to take an array for the object property.
For the above example you could then write:

{"object": ["obj", "foo"], "name": "bar"}

[adidahiya]

bump @ajafff, can you address @nchen63's comments?

[ajafff]

@adidahiya I actually did that and messed up a rebase recently ... will fix that

[ajafff]

While thinking about #2821 I realized that there shouldn't be an object property. Instead name should be an array like it was before. But instead of limiting it to 2 elements for specifying the qualified name of the banned property, it should be open ended.
That would allow what @JoshuaKGoldberg requested in #2821

{"name": ["chai", "assert", "equal"], "message": "Use strictEqual instead of equal"}

Any thoughts about adding a wildcard to address @nchen63's comment #2547 (comment) to ban a property globally?

{"name": ["*", "forEach"], "message": "Use a regular for loop instead"}
// bans [].forEach(...) as well as foo.forEach(...), foo.bar.forEach(...) and foo.bar.baz.forEach(...)

[adidahiya]

But instead of limiting it to 2 elements for specifying the qualified name of the banned property, it should be open ended.

sgtm 👍

Any thoughts about adding a wildcard

also seems fine, as the user is making it explicit that they are engaging in potentially wild behavior 😂

[ajafff]

PR updated to allow banning nested methods as requested in #2821 and added a wildcard for method bans