Implement Compare trait for @list.List with lexicographic order

[Copilot]

This PR implements the missing Compare trait for @list.List, addressing the consistency issue where @immut/list.List had Compare support but @list.List did not.

Changes

• Added Compare implementation: Implements lexicographic comparison for @list.List where elements are compared pairwise until a difference is found. When all shared elements are equal, the shorter list is considered less than the longer one.

• Added comprehensive tests: Includes test cases covering lexicographic comparison, length-based comparison when prefixes are equal, equality comparison, and empty list edge cases.

• Updated interface: The pkg.generated.mbti file now exposes impl[A : Compare] Compare for List[A] in the public API.

Implementation Details

The implementation follows lexicographic order semantics as clarified in the issue discussion:

let list1 = @list.of([1, 2, 3])
let list2 = @list.of([1, 2, 4])  
let list3 = @list.of([1, 2])

list1.compare(list2)  // -1 (lexicographic: 3 < 4)
list1.compare(list3)  // 1  (length: [1,2,3] > [1,2])
list3.compare(list1)  // -1 (length: [1,2] < [1,2,3])

This provides consistency with other data structures in the standard library and enables @list.List to be used in contexts requiring total ordering, such as sorted collections.

Fixes #[issue_number]

Original prompt

---

This section details on the original issue you should resolve

<issue_title>[Consistency Review] missing Compare impl for list.List</issue_title>
<issue_description>Current behaviors

There's no Compare implementation for @list.List. But there's Compare implementation for @immut/list.List

Expected behaviors

There's Compare implementation for @list.List

Justification
</issue_description>

<agent_instructions>Implement the Compare trait for the List under @list package. Follow the common implementations which is lexicographic order.</agent_instructions>

Comments on the Issue (you are @copilot in this section)

@peter-jerry-ye No, it won't be shortlex.

With the Compare implementation, we only guarantee total order, so the Compare for the list will be lexicographic order instead of shortlex.</comment_new>
<comment_new>@peter-jerry-ye
Again, we don't have the consistency between data structures. The compare order is not guaranteed between Option[T] and Result[T, Unit].</comment_new>

---- **Additional instructions:**

Implement the Compare trait for the List under @list package. Follow the common implementations which is lexicographic order.

Fixes #2757

---

💬 Share your feedback on Copilot coding agent for the chance to win a $200 gift card! Click here to start the survey.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 1340

Details

• 8 of 8 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage increased (+0.009%) to 89.13%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 1332:	0.009%
Covered Lines:	9290
Relevant Lines:	10423

---

💛 - Coveralls

[hackwaly]

break here is redundant.

Either

if cmp != 0 { break cmp }
continue (xs, ys)

or

if cmp != 0 { 
  cmp
} else {
  continue (xs, ys)
}

.

[hackwaly]

We should add a lint rule for this. @myfreess

if x {
  return y // or other control flow transfer statement, e.g. break, raise, ...
} else {
  z
}