Allow narrowing of unions discriminated by numeric literals using `>` `<` etc

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

### 🔎 Search Terms

"arguments length"

### 🕗 Version & Regression Information

It works the same in v3.3.3

### ⏯ Playground Link

https://www.typescriptlang.org/play/?target=99&module=0&ts=5.8.3#code/GYVwdgxgLglg9mABAUwB4EMC2AHANsgRgAoA6M9AJwHMBnALkQG0wRMAjZCgXUQB8muASkQBvAFCJJiGMERFKtEvjBUoAC0QA+RAAZh4qYcQVkUEBSQKajHVwDcEqQF8UuGslGOjx0+aQA5dH8HQycxMNBIWAQUDBx8ACZScmp6JhZ2Th5+RiFPQxk5KyVkFXV9LyMTMwtEKxt7SpdkNw8Dbx8agKCQ53CxSOh4JDQsPGQAZmSSKwZmVg5uPgEKgtl5VJKyjQBePd1Vjuq-REDgptd3fKPfWvrbXskwpyA

### 💻 Code

Some basic ways to check if we have any arguments could be these:

```ts
function example1(...args: [number] | []) {
if (args.length > 0) {
return args[0];
} else {
return NaN;
}
}
function example2(...args: [number] | []) {
if (args.length) {
return args[0];
} else {
return NaN;
}
}
function example3(...args: [number] | []) {
if (args.length === 0) {
return NaN;
} else {
return args[0];
}
}
```

But TS doesn't seem to understand the first one.

### 🙁 Actual behavior

It doesn't understand the way it's done in "example1".

### 🙂 Expected behavior

It should understand the way it's done in "example1".

### Additional information about the issue

Type inference on "args" after the check for "example1":


Type inference on "args" after the check for "example2":


Type inference on "args" after the check for "example3":


Notice how for "example2" and "example3" the type is correctly narrowed to just `[number]`, but for "example1" the unnarowed `[number] | []` type remains.

以链接的 TypeScript Playground 示例作为入口点；将 args.length > 0 的控制流缩窄与现有的 truthiness 和 equality 情况进行比较。完成的标准是：example1 在 true 分支中将 [number] | [] 缩窄为 [number]，同时不丢失 examples 2 和 3 所展示的行为。

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。