[libc++][test] Fix assumptions that `std::array` iterators are pointers (#74430)

Found while running libc++'s tests with MSVC's STL, where `std::array`
iterators are never pointers.

Most of these changes are reasonably self-explanatory (the `std::array`s
are right there, and the sometimes-slightly-wrapped raw pointer types
are a short distance away). A couple of changes are less obvious:

In `libcxx/test/std/containers/from_range_helpers.h`, `wrap_input()` is
called with `Iter` types that are constructible from raw pointers. It's
also sometimes called with an `array` as the `input`, so the first
overload was implicitly assuming that `array` iterators are pointers. We
can fix this assumption by providing a dedicated overload for `array`,
just like the one for `vector` immediately below. Finally,
`from_range_helpers.h` should explicitly include both `<array>` and
`<vector>`, even though they were apparently being dragged in already.

In `libcxx/test/std/containers/views/views.span/span.cons/iterator_sentinel.pass.cpp`,
fix `throw_operator_minus`. The error was pretty complicated, caused by
the concepts machinery noticing that `value_type` and `element_type`
were inconsistent. In the template instantiation context, you can see
the critical detail that `throw_operator_minus<std::_Array_iterator>` is
being formed.

Fortunately, the fix is extremely simple. To produce `element_type`
(which retains any cv-qualification, unlike `value_type`), we shouldn't
attempt to `remove_pointer` with the iterator type `It`. Instead, we've
already obtained the `reference` type, so we can `remove_reference_t`.
(This is modern code, where we have access to the alias templates, so I
saw no reason to use the older verbose form.)