…fore Python 3.9 (#16558)

Summary
--

This PR reuses a slightly modified version of the
`check_tuple_unpacking` method added for detecting unpacking in `return`
and `yield` statements to detect the same issue in the iterator clause
of `for` loops.

I ran into the same issue with a bare `for x in *rest: ...` example
(invalid even on Python 3.13) and added it as a comment on
#16520.

I considered just making this an additional `StarTupleKind` variant as
well, but this change was in a different version of Python, so I kept it
separate.

Test Plan
--

New inline tests.

…ot found (#16721)

## Summary

Restores #16319 after it got
dropped from the 0.10 release branch :(

---------

Co-authored-by: dylwil3 <[email protected]>

#16720)

## Summary

I accidentially dropped this commit from the Ruff 0.10 release. See
#16699

## Summary

This changeset adds proper support for assignments to attributes:
```py
obj.attr = value
```

In particular, the following new features are now available:

* We previously didn't raise any errors if you tried to assign to a
non-existing attribute `attr`. This is now fixed.
* If `type(obj).attr` is a data descriptor, we now call its `__set__`
method instead of trying to assign to the load-context type of
`obj.attr`, which can be different for data descriptors.
* An initial attempt was made to support unions and intersections, as
well as possibly-unbound situations. There are some remaining TODOs in
tests, but they only affect edge cases. Having nested diagnostics would
be one way that could help solve the remaining cases, I believe.

## Follow ups

The following things are planned as follow-ups:

- Write a test suite with snapshot diagnostics for various attribute
assignment errors
- Improve the diagnostics. An easy improvement would be to highlight the
right hand side of the assignment as a secondary span (with the rhs type
as additional information). Some other ideas are mentioned in TODO
comments in this PR.
- Improve the union/intersection/possible-unboundness handling
- Add support for calling custom `__setattr__` methods (see new false
positive in the ecosystem results)

## Ecosystem changes

Some changes are related to assignments on attributes with a custom
`__setattr__` method (see above). Since we didn't notice missing
attributes at all in store context previously, these are new.

The other changes are related to properties. We previously used their
read-context type to test the assignment. That results in weird error
messages, as we often see assignments to `self.property` and then we
think that those are instance attributes *and* descriptors, leading to
union types. Now we properly look them up on the meta type, see the
decorated function, and try to overwrite it with the new value (as we
don't understand decorators yet). Long story short: the errors are still
weird, we need to understand decorators to make them go away.

## Test Plan

New Markdown tests

## Summary

This PR includes minor improvements to binary operation inference,
specifically for tuple concatenation.

### Before

```py
reveal_type((1, 2) + (3, 4))  # revealed: @todo(return type of decorated function)
# If TODO is ignored, the revealed type would be `tuple[1|2|3|4, ...]`
```

The `builtins.tuple` type stub defines `__add__`, but it appears to only
work for homogeneous tuples. However, I think this limitation is not
ideal for many use cases.

### After

```py
reveal_type((1, 2) + (3, 4))  # revealed: tuple[Literal[1], Literal[2], Literal[3], Literal[4]]
```

## Test Plan

### Added
- `mdtest/binary/tuples.md`

### Affected
- `mdtest/slots.md` (a test have been moved out of the `False-Negative`
block.)

## Summary

WIP.

Adds some preliminary tests for `typing.Final`.

## Test Plan

New MD tests

## Summary

Follow-up release for Ruff v0.10 that now includes the following two
changes that we intended to ship but slipped:

* Changes to how the Python version is inferred when a `target-version`
is not specified (#16319)
* `blanket-noqa` (`PGH004`): Also detect blanked file-level noqa
comments (and not just line level comments).

## Test plan

I verified that the binary built on this branch respects the
`requires-python` setting
([logs](https://www.diffchecker.com/qyJWYi6W/), left: v0.10, right:
v0.11)