Cache the DetectableDB scan results

[Chlorobyte-but-real]

Inspired by a performance problem rightfully pointed out in PR #92, I set out to greatly optimize the process scan:

Scenario	Time	Notes
main
Before	🟨 133.7ms
After	🟩 2.3ms	Highly skewed due to what I think are GC spikes, most scans run way below 1ms!
With #92
Before	🟥 2699ms
After	🟩 0.3ms	NOT faster than main, simply no GC spikes happened here

The change works on my end, but is also provably correct (assuming DetectableDB does not change) because:

• the scan results depend on DetectableDB's contents, args, and toCompare
• toCompare is derived from splitPath
• splitPath is derived from path

Notes:

• for the times, I subtracted the time it takes to get processes using await Native.getProcesses();. Improve linux game detection #92 does add functionality to this call but the performance difference is negligible (16.3ms -> 18.3ms, possibly within margin of error)
• my system has a Ryzen 9 7940HS, the difference is much more significant on lower end setups where the process scan with the other PR included could have taken more than the 5 second budget and got into a loop of continuously consuming 1 CPU core!
• the results were recorded under no system activity, new processes coming to be will cause spikes but hopefully never worse than redundantly running every single process by DetectableDB.

Open questions:

• I'm not sure that the theoretically possible case of multiple DetectableDB entries being detected with one process is intentional, but I cache an array of all detected entries to keep this behavior
• Could it be worth to reduce the frequency of process scans (from 5000ms to, say, 1000ms) along with this change to make the detection of games quicker?
• A memory leak might be possible if many, many processes with different paths and args are created, should I purge unseen processes from the cache?

[Dekomoro]

Seems like it works with some slight reduction in cpu and memory usage as well. I will update after trying in combination with #92 but it seems good so far.

[Dekomoro]

It appears in combo with 92 the cpu and memory usage goes up but not by much. I do see the memory usage going up at a very slow rate consistently while idling and slightly faster while multiple different processes are running.
I do think purging unseen processes from the cache may solve this, but I lack the expertise to know for sure.

I have direct contact with chlorobyte if anyone asks how I managed to test the combined pr.

[CanadaHonk]

Wow this is great, thank you! Small request: could you just store detected in the cache instead of { detected }?

[Chlorobyte-but-real]

Sure, that makes sense. Also implemented some sort of garbage collection to resolve @Dekomoro's concern, in a normal use case you basically never hit this (or maybe you do like once an hour of runtime or something)