KF-27 Add tests for TreeMap

[belyshevdenis]

I've removed removeByObject method because it can delete wrong object using the view of a node that doesn't exists. For example, if you try to remove object with non-existing value 60, it constructs the node with key 2 (that equals to value 20) and deletes it.

[Copilot]

Pull Request Overview

This PR adds comprehensive test coverage for the TreeMap class and removes a potentially unsafe removeByObject method that could delete incorrect objects due to faulty node construction logic.

• Adds extensive BDD-style test cases covering all TreeMap methods and edge cases
• Removes the problematic removeByObject method to prevent incorrect object deletion
• Suppresses a deprecated API warning in the GenericTableAvl allocation routine

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

File	Description
test/TreeMapTest.cpp	New comprehensive test file covering TreeMap functionality with BDD-style scenarios
test/CMakeLists.txt	Adds TreeMapTest.cpp to the build configuration
include/kf/TreeMap.h	Removes the unsafe removeByObject method
include/kf/GenericTableAvl.h	Suppresses deprecation warning for ExAllocatePoolWithTag

[belyshevdenis]

I've removed removeByObject method because it can delete wrong object using the view of a node that doesn't exists. For example, if you try to remove object with non-existing value 60, it constructs the node with key 2 (that equals to value 20) and deletes it.

@SergiusTheBest I've encountered the same problem in tests for LinkedTreeMap: the remove method uses CONTAINING_RECORD, that creates a view for a not existed node and it leads to memory access violation. So, the usage of CONTAINING_RECORD is not safe for not existant values.

[SergiusTheBest]

I've removed removeByObject method because it can delete wrong object using the view of a node that doesn't exists. For example, if you try to remove object with non-existing value 60, it constructs the node with key 2 (that equals to value 20) and deletes it.

@belyshevdenis But we use that method, so we need it.

[SergiusTheBest]

I've removed removeByObject method because it can delete wrong object using the view of a node that doesn't exists. For example, if you try to remove object with non-existing value 60, it constructs the node with key 2 (that equals to value 20) and deletes it.

@SergiusTheBest I've encountered the same problem in tests for LinkedTreeMap: the remove method uses CONTAINING_RECORD, that creates a view for a not existed node and it leads to memory access violation. So, the usage of CONTAINING_RECORD is not safe for not existant values.

Oh, I see! removeByObject accepts an object that is in the map. If the object is not in the map then it's undefined behavior.