Remove Testing of Optional Sequences/Dictionaries which hold Classes

[InsertCreativityHere]

The title pretty much says it.
We still extensively test optional sequences and dictionaries of other types. So it's probably fine to just remove these tests.

[pepone]

Do we test the Sequence/Dictionary of optionals in some other place?

[InsertCreativityHere]

If you mean something like:

class C {
    optional(4) int i;
}
sequence<C> CS;

myTest(p: CS); // test function that uses `CS`.

Then no, if this PR is merged as is, we won't have any testing for these things.
We have lots of tests for 'optional sequences', but none for 'sequences of optionals'.

To be fair, right now we only tangentially have these tests. Because we only have tests of
'optional sequences of classes with optionals'. I don't believe we have tests for
'non-optional sequences of classes with optionals'.

---

Originally I tried to adapt these tests to continue testing them, but the structure of the Optional test made it difficult to do.
If we feel this is an important case to cover (which I could somewhat agree to) I think it's still best to delete these tests, but add new ones that test specifically "non-optional sequences of classes with optionals".