syntactic_sugar rule breaks optional existential any return values

[AttilaTheFun]

New Issue Checklist

• Updated SwiftLint to the latest version
• I searched for existing GitHub issues

Describe the bug

Protocols with primary associated types used as optional return values cannot use the ? syntactic sugar.

Given:

protocol Foo<Bar> {
  associatedtype Foo
  func foo() -> Foo
}

A function that returns an optional Foo must be written:

func buildFoo<T>() -> Optional<any Foo<T>>

But the syntactic_sugar rule autocorrects this to:

func buildFoo<T>() -> any Foo<T>?

Which results in the compiler error:

use of protocol Foo<Bar>? must be written Optional<any Foo<Bar>>

To address this, the syntactic_sugar rule should not suggest this correction for optionals with an existential after their opening angle bracket (some or any).

[SimplyDanny]

The proper fixes proposed by the syntactic_sugar rule would be (any Foo<T>)? and (some Foo<T>)?.