CppCheck: use some stl algorithms

[jhaigh0]

Description of work

A bit of cppcheck suppression file pruning, in this case dealing with some of the useStlAlgorithm errors.
I got to look at a little under half of these and some I've left in because they'd just make the code much more confusing (which probably means there needs to be some refactoring really).

Hopefully all the changes I've made are for quite simple cases.

I tried to format all the lambda functions nicely but often clang has other ideas.

There is no associated issue.

To test:

• Tests pass
• These do need to be looked over quite carefully, I've tried to keep the functionality completely the same.

---

Reviewer

Please comment on the points listed below (full description).
Your comments will be used as part of the gatekeeper process, so please comment clearly on what you have checked during your review. If changes are made to the PR during the review process then your final comment will be the most important for gatekeepers. In this comment you should make it clear why any earlier review is still valid, or confirm that all requested changes have been addressed.

Code Review

• Is the code of an acceptable quality?
• Does the code conform to the coding standards?
• Are the unit tests small and test the class in isolation?
• If there is GUI work does it follow the GUI standards?
• If there are changes in the release notes then do they describe the changes appropriately?
• Do the release notes conform to the release notes guide?

Functional Tests

• Do changes function as described? Add comments below that describe the tests performed?
• Do the changes handle unexpected situations, e.g. bad input?
• Has the relevant (user and developer) documentation been added/updated?

Does everything look good? Mark the review as Approve. A member of @mantidproject/gatekeepers will take care of it.

Gatekeeper

If you need to request changes to a PR then please add a comment and set the review status to "Request changes". This will stop the PR from showing up in the list for other gatekeepers.

[robertapplin]

Code looks good, much easier to read in my opinion! Just had a few minor suggestions, and one question to make sure I don't miss something that may be a difference (but probably not)

[robertapplin]

Thanks for the changes. Did a code review and I can't see any differences to the old behaviour!