Fix/Reschedule doesn't work on cards in filtered deck

[L-M-Sherlock]

fix #3439

A similar function may also need to be fixed:

anki/rslib/src/search/sqlwriter.rs

Lines 484 to 495 in f3b0afc

	fn write_deck_id_with_children(&mut self, deck_id: DeckId) -> Result<()> {
	if let Some(parent) = self.col.get_deck(deck_id)? {
	let ids = self.col.storage.deck_id_with_children(&parent)?;
	let mut buf = String::new();
	ids_to_string(&mut buf, &ids);
	write!(self.sql, "c.did in {}", buf,).unwrap();
	} else {
	self.sql.push_str("false")
	}
	Ok(())
	}

[dae]

These are currently documented as not matching cards in filtered decks:

    /// Matches cards in a list of decks (original_deck_id is not checked).
    DeckIdsWithoutChildren(String),
    /// Matches cards in a deck or its children (original_deck_id is not
    /// checked).
    DeckIdWithChildren(DeckId),

I've done a brief scan over the existing usages, and didn't notice any cases where the change is likely to break things, but it's not how they were originally intended to behave, so I get a bit nervous about changing them. Any thoughts on this change @RumovZ?

[RumovZ]

Wouldn't that at least break (or alter) user searches containing did:...?

Looks like you've added DeckIdsWithoutChildren to avoid bugs by forcing explicitness. As it seems the original deck id is a similar source of issues, maybe it would be best to make that explicit, too:

DeckIds {
    ids: String,
    with_children: bool,
    with_filtered: bool,
}

[brishtibheja]

Wouldn't that at least break (or alter) user searches containing did:...?

That isn't documented anywhere, so do users use this search? I think most wouldn't be aware.

[RumovZ]

It's probably not used much, but might still be useful to add-ons and power users.
In any case, I don't see an argument for breaking any compatibility when it's so easy to support both use cases.