Newer serialization macros not listed in README

[gregmarr]

Description

As described in #4235 , the README only lists NLOHMANN_DEFINE_TYPE_NON_INTRUSIVE and NLOHMANN_DEFINE_TYPE_INTRUSIVE. There are now 6 macros.

There is documentation for these other 4, so it could just link to the documentation for more info on the other 4, rather than expanding the examples to cover all of them.

Also, only the two mentioned in the readme have @brief macro tags, rather than all 6, and the order of the intrusive versions doesn't match the order of the non-intrusive versions.

Reproduction steps

n/a

Expected vs. actual results

n/a

Minimal code example

No response

Error messages

No response

Compiler and operating system

n/a

Library version

a259ecc

Validation

• The bug also occurs if the latest version from the develop branch is used.
• I can successfully compile and run the unit tests.

[nlohmann]

I overworked the documentation for the serialization macros in #4560. As such:

• the README now only has brief example and a link to https://json.nlohmann.me/features/arbitrary_types/#simplify-your-life-with-macros
• the "Simplify your life with macros" now properly lists six macros (for non-derived types) and mentions the other 6 for derived types. I also added a decision table to jump to the right macro documentation.
• the section on the serialization macros on the overview page (https://json.nlohmann.me/features/macros/) now only links to https://json.nlohmann.me/features/arbitrary_types/#simplify-your-life-with-macros to avoid repetition
• the macro page in the API reference (https://json.nlohmann.me/api/macros/) now has a one-line description for every serialization macro and links to the respective detail page
• the detail pages (https://json.nlohmann.me/api/macros/nlohmann_define_type_intrusive/, https://json.nlohmann.me/api/macros/nlohmann_define_type_non_intrusive/, and https://json.nlohmann.me/api/macros/nlohmann_define_derived_type/) are now properly linked via "see also", and I added an overview table

This all should close this issue, but definitely needs some review...

[nikhilreddydev]

The documentation is now clear and very organized.
Looks good to me.
Thank you!