[Fix #12309] Add new Style/RedundantSuperArguments cop

[Earlopain]

#12309 Implements the following:

def method(a, b, c:, d: &e)
  super(a, b, c:, d:, &e)
  # => super
end

There are 57 offenses of this kind in Rails master.

Looks like I picked quite the doozy for my first cop. I managed but I'm open to feedback on how to write better code here.
I tried to think of all the constellations you can use super in and handling those appropriately in the cop but I'm not certain if I got it all. Let me know if there are other edge-cases that need to be considered, like calling super inside define_singleton_method.

The cop could be more intelligent with keyword arguments when they appear in different orders like in the following example but I'll leave that be for now since the cop seems quite complex already. Something to improve upon in the future.

def test(a:, b:)
  super(b:, a:)
end

• The PR relates to only one subject with a clear title and description in grammatically correct, complete sentences.
• Wrote good commit messages.
• Commit message starts with [Fix #issue-number] (if the related issue exists).
• Feature branch is up-to-date with master (if not - rebase it).
• Squashed related commits together.
• Added tests.
• Ran bundle exec rake default. It executes all tests and runs RuboCop on its own code.
• Added an entry (file) to the changelog folder named {change_type}_{change_description}.md if the new code introduces user-observable changes. See changelog entry format for details.

[koic]

There might be users who intentionally write explicit arguments. So, I wonder if the cop name "Redundant" is suitable.
And, it would be beneficial to first suggest a rationale in the style guide for using zero arity super (zsuper) when super can have its arguments omitted:
https://github.com/rubocop/ruby-style-guide

[koic]

It's likely that cop name such as Style/ZeroAritySuper cop may be better appropriate, I think.