Wip sip23 √

SIP-14 improvements

Add missing canonical combinators:
  `def transform[S](f: Try[T] => Try[S])(implicit executor: ExecutionContext): Future[S]`
  `def transformWith[S](f: Try[T] => Future[S])(implicit executor: ExecutionContext): Future[S]`
  `def flatten[S](implicit ev: T <:< Future[S]): Future[S]`

Add missing utilities:
  `val unit: Future[Unit]` in `object Future`
  `val never: Future[Nothing]` in `object Future`

Refactor:
  the scala.concurrent.Future trait to not explicit create any Promises, so that implementations can control implementation type, this is mainly facilitated through adding of the `transform` and `transformWith` methods.
  the implementation of ExecutionContextImpl has been cleaned up

Secure:
  Add a self-check in completeWith and tryCompleteWith to avoid cycles in trait Promise
  Capping the maximum number of Threads for the global ExecutionContext to the max parallelism
  Implementing (almost) all `Future` combinators on `transformWith` and `transform` meant that DefaultPromise linking works on both (flat)map and recover(With)

Remove:
  the private internalExecutor method in favor of an import in trait Future
  the private internalExecutor method in favor of an import in trait Promise
  the AtomicReferenceFieldUpdater in AbstractPromise since we're using Unsafe
  scala.concurrent.impl.Future is no longer needed

Deprecate:
  Future.onSuccess - discourage the use of callbacks (and is also redundant considering `foreach` and `onComplete`)
  Future.onFailure - discourage the use of callbacks (and is also redundant considering `onComplete`)
  ExecutionContext.prepare - it was ill specced and it is too easy to forget to call it or even know when to call it or call it more times than needed

Reimplement:
  failed - in terms of `transform`
  map - in terms of `transform`
  flatMap - in terms of `transformWith`
  recover - in terms of `transform`
  recoverWith - in terms of `transformWith`
  zip - in terms of `flatMap` + `map`
  fallbackTo - in terms of `recoverWith` + `recoverWith`
  andThen - in terms of `transform`

  Documentation:
    Almost all methods on Future and Promise have been revisited and had their ScalaDoc updated

  Tests:
      Yes
> I see transform and transformWith as more canonical than onComplete

I see where you come from: you can implement `onComplete` in terms of `transformWith` but not the other way round. On the other hand, it also seems strange - if you see the chain of promises/futures as a data flow graph - that it is "allowed" or expected for the data to end up in a non-terminal transformation stage. Wouldn't every respectable Future setup like to have an `onComplete` at its leaves?