feat: improve UsedStateEVMInspector by adding other op-codes that read or write

[bertmiller]

During simulation we use an EVM inspector to get state that is used by a transaction by looking at the storage slots that a transaction reads and writes from. We could supplement this by adding other op-codes that read or write state. A few off the top of my head that we should add:

• balance
• selfbalance
• create (balance and nonce is read)
• create2 (balance and nonce is read)
• selfdestruct (balance and nonce is read)

Do we need to support EXTCODECOPY, EXTCODEHASH, or EXTCODESIZE too? Not sure but I think so because some transactions might condition their execution on these and others might deploy contracts.

The goal would be to improve our coverage of what state is being used and how.

https://github.com/flashbots/rbuilder/blob/develop/crates/rbuilder/src/building/evm_inspector.rs

[nikoseven]

I'd like to work on this.
I'm considering adding three more fields to UsedStateTrace. Does that sound good?

pub struct UsedStateTrace {
     ...
    // account read set
    pub balance_read_set: HashMap<Address, U256>,
    // list for contract create/destruct
    pub created_contract_addr_list: Vec<Address>,
    pub destructed_contract_addr_list: Vec<Address>,
}

[ZanCorDX]

To have all the balance information we might need I believe it would be better to have something like this:

   // first balance account read
    pub balance_read_set: HashMap<Address, U256>,
    // last balance account written
    pub balance_write_set: HashMap<Address, U256>,

What do you think?

[ZanCorDX]

The names we already had were not the best, read_set/write_set are not very meaningful.
It might be nice to correct them (if possible in another PR) to something like read_slot_values/written_slot_values (or read_slots/written_slots?) so your fields can be more like read_balances/written_balances and created_contracts/destructed_contracts.
What do you think?