I think the original idea was to elide `Array<$T>` if there is
a binding a resolved generic arguments i.e. `Array<Float>`, but
the check doesn't account for the fact that bindings could be
of different kinds and there are some implicit conversions that
could be missed if we remove the bindings.
For example, given the following constraints:
`Array<$T0> conv $T1`
`$T1 conv Array<(String, Int)>`
`$T0` can be a supertype of `Array<$T0>` and subtype of `Array<(String, Int)>`.
The solver should accept both types as viable bindings because the
`$T0` could be bound to `(key: String, value: Int)` and that would
match `Array<(String, Int)>` conversion.