Check correct index for skipping cut propagation

[Opt-Mucca]

I noticed this while trying to debug something else. I believe we're simply using the wrong index in a check (luckily the index can never be out of range so it will never fail a test). Specifically, we're checking the propagatecutflags_[k], where k is the index looping over a subset of cuts we want to propagate, while we should be checking propagatecutflags[propagateinds[k]], i.e., the actual index of the cut being checked. Current behavior means we could be skipping propagation of some cut because a cut at another index has been deleted.

@fwesselm The propagation code is headache inducing, so I'd appreciate a second set of eyes checking this.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 81.27%. Comparing base (263398e) to head (4d0fc37).
⚠️ Report is 10 commits behind head on latest.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           latest    #2679   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   81.26%   81.27%           
=======================================
  Files         349      349           
  Lines       85779    85779           
=======================================
+ Hits        69707    69713    +6     
+ Misses      16072    16066    -6     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[fwesselm]

Good catch @Opt-Mucca! Looks good!