fix: Make conform_record_data_types work on nested objects and arrays

[Jack-Burnett]

Closes #800

conform_record_data_types is responsible for converting values into json-legal form and removing fields that are not in the catalog.

Previously conform_record_data_types only worked on primitive fields on the given record.
This PR expands it to also work on lists of primitives, nested objects, and lists of objects.

Since the options available for a list are pretty wide in jsonschema, this PR only addresses lists of uniform type (e.g. a single schema applies to the whole list, as opposed to different schemas for different indices), as this is the most common type in my experience.

When logging a list of fields it has removed, it will log them with their path, e.g. "base_obect_name.child_object.primitive_value".

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #887 (69f0b18) into main (bae2b05) will increase coverage by 0.67%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #887      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   83.85%   84.53%   +0.67%     
==========================================
  Files          44       44              
  Lines        4151     4189      +38     
  Branches      718      725       +7     
==========================================
+ Hits         3481     3541      +60     
+ Misses        490      474      -16     
+ Partials      180      174       -6     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
singer_sdk/helpers/_typing.py	72.30% <100.00%> (+19.51%)	⬆️
singer_sdk/streams/core.py	85.88% <100.00%> (+0.13%)	⬆️

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[aaronsteers]

@Jack-Burnett - Thanks very much for this contribution! @edgarrmondragon is primary reviewer for this. Since this is a non-trivial change, it may require a few days and up to a week for review and discussion.

@edgarrmondragon - Let me know if I can assist in any way.

[Jack-Burnett]

Hey @edgarrmondragon, I saw you approved this but didn't merge it - just wanted to check if you wanted any changes, or is it still being reviewed? No worries either way