Revert URL subtraction

[bdraco]

We merged the URL subtraction a bit too soon, and we need to rework the approach. I now have ~20 hours into it trying to solve the issues. The conclusion is that it is not ready to ship and we need a new approach. I sincerely hope that a revert will not dissuade a second attempt.

To ensure it does not go out before its ready, revert the original PR and the followup attempts to solve the issues with it so we can start fresh.

We have the following known issues that we don't have a solution for right now:

• Time complexity is roughly O(base_path_segments * target_path_segments) and its the slowest benchmark we have in the library right now:
• 
• Empty segments are not handled correctly Reduce time complexity of URL subtraction #1388 (comment)
• Potentially handling special cases with leading/trailing slashes Reduce time complexity of URL subtraction #1388 (comment)

References
#1340
#1388
#1379
#1382

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #1391 will not alter performance

_{Comparing revert_subtraction (402a8b0) with master (6a2a90a)}

Summary

✅ 83 untouched benchmarks

⁉️ 2 (👁 2) dropped benchmarks

Benchmarks breakdown

	Benchmark	master	revert_subtraction	Change
👁	test_url_subtract	13.7 ms	N/A	N/A
👁	test_url_subtract_long_urls	157.6 ms	N/A	N/A

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.00%. Comparing base (6a2a90a) to head (402a8b0).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1391      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.05%   96.00%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files          31       31              
  Lines        5784     5683     -101     
  Branches      361      353       -8     
==========================================
- Hits         5556     5456     -100     
+ Misses        202      201       -1     
  Partials       26       26              

Flag	Coverage Δ
CI-GHA	96.00% <100.00%> (-0.06%)	⬇️
MyPy	45.62% <100.00%> (-0.60%)	⬇️
OS-Linux	99.54% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
OS-Windows	99.61% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
OS-macOS	99.29% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.10.11	99.27% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.10.15	99.50% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.11.10	99.50% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.11.9	99.27% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.12.7	99.50% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.13.0	99.50% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.9.13	99.22% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-3.9.20	99.46% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-pypy7.3.16	99.52% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-pypy7.3.17	99.54% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
VM-macos-latest	99.29% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
VM-ubuntu-latest	99.54% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
VM-windows-latest	99.61% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
pytest	99.54% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.