This PR introduces three changes to the diagnostic and fix behavior (still under preview) for boolean-chained-comparison (PLR1716).

1. We now offer a fix in the case of parenthesized expressions like (a < b) and b < c. The fix will merge the chains of comparisons and then balance parentheses by adding parentheses to one side of the expression.
2. We now trigger a diagnostic (and fix) in the case where some comparisons have multiple comparators like a < b < c and c < d.
3. When adjacent comparators are parenthesized, we prefer the left parenthesization and apply the replacement to the whole parenthesized range. So, for example, a < (b) and ((b)) < c becomes a < (b) < c.

While these seem like somewhat disconnected changes, they are actually related. If we only offered (1), then we would see the following fix behavior:

- (a < b) and b < c and ((c < d))
+ (a < b < c) and ((c < d))

This is because the fix which add parentheses to the first pair of comparisons overlaps with the fix that removes the and between the second two comparisons. So the latter fix is deferred. However, the latter fix does not get a second chance because, upon the next lint iteration, there is no violation of PLR1716.

Upon adopting (2), however, both fixes occur by the time ruff completes several iterations and we get:

- (a < b) and b < c and ((c < d))
+ ((a < b < c < d))

Finally, (3) fixes a previously unobserved bug wherein the autofix for a < (b) and b < c used to result in a<(b<c which gives a syntax error. It could in theory have been fixed in a separate PR, but seems to be on theme here.

• Closes PLR1716 fix introduces a syntax error with unbalanced parentheses #13524
• (1), (2), and (3) are implemented in separate commits for ease of review and modification.
• Technically a user can trigger an error in ruff (by reaching max iterations) if they have a humongous boolean chained comparison with differing parentheses levels.