Add containsMatchingInOrder  containsEqualInOrder (#2284)

The joined behavior in `containsInOrder` has some usability issues:
- It mimics the arguments for `deepEquals`, but it doesn't have the same
  behavior for collection typed elements. Checking that a nested
  collection is contained in order requires a `Condition` callback that
  uses `.deepEquals` explicitly.
- The `Object?` signature throws away inference on the `Condition`
  callback arguments. With a method that supports only conditions the
  argument type can be tightened and allow inference.


Deprecate the old `containsInOrder` and plan to remove it before stable.
This is a bit more restrictive, but it's not too noisy to fit a few
`(it) => it.equals(foo)` in a collection that needs mixed behavior and
the collection of two methods is less confusing to document than the
joined behavior.

Lean on the "Matches" verb for cases that check a `Condition` callback
and rename `pairwiseComparesTo` as `pairwiseMatches`.

Fix a type check when pretty printing `Condition` callbacks. Match
more than `Condition<dynamic>` by checking `Condition<Never>`.