fix(app): allow static segments as siblings of dynamic route segments

[benedikt-bartscher]

_find_route_conflict flagged a conflict whenever an existing route's dynamic segment lined up with a different static segment of a new bracket-containing route (e.g. /posts/[id] vs /posts/all/[x]), and only in that registration order. React Router resolves such siblings fine (static wins), so only two dynamic segments with different names at the same position are a real conflict.

[greptile-apps]

Greptile Summary

This PR refines route-conflict detection so static route segments can coexist with dynamic siblings while differently named dynamic segments at the same position remain conflicts.

• Compares normalized segments from both routes to distinguish static/dynamic siblings from dynamic/dynamic conflicts.
• Adds regression coverage for both route-registration orders.
• Adds a bug-fix news fragment.

Confidence Score: 5/5

The PR appears safe to merge.

No blocking failure remains.

Important Files Changed

Filename	Overview
reflex/app.py	Updates route-conflict detection to permit static and dynamic siblings while retaining rejection of differently named dynamic peers.
tests/units/test_route.py	Adds bidirectional regression cases covering static segments alongside dynamic route segments.
news/+static-dynamic-route-conflict.bugfix.md	Documents the corrected route-registration behavior and its former order dependence.

_{Reviews (4): Last reviewed commit: "Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/m..." | Re-trigger Greptile}

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 27 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 8 skipped benchmarks¹

---

_{Comparing benedikt-bartscher:fix-static-dynamic-route-conflict (64c7725) with main (bb7ed7c)}

Footnotes

1. 8 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

[cubic-dev-ai]

No issues found across 2 files

_{Re-trigger cubic}