Restrict types from Uint8Array<ArrayBufferLike> to Uint8Array<ArrayBuffer>

[ussu]

What?

In Typescript 5.9, there is a more precise typechecking, for instance regarding ArrayBuffer vs SharedArrayBuffer, which are both an ArrayBufferLike
It seems like what pdf-lib uses can always be typed as an ArrayBuffer rather than a SharedArrayBuffer or ArrayBufferLike, so this PR aims to narrow the return types in the package to ArrayBuffer to improve compatibility with other libs

Why?

#132

How?

Updating @types/node to a recent version allows typescript to narrow down most instances of Uint8Array to Uint8Array
In functions exposed by pdf-lib, simply removing the return types explicitly set to Uint8Array ( = Uint8Array) allows typescript to correctly infer the return type to Uint8Array

Testing?

New Dependencies?

no

Screenshots

n/a

Suggested Reading?

Anything Else?

Checklist

• I read CONTRIBUTING.md.
• I read MAINTAINERSHIP.md#pull-requests.
• I added/updated unit tests for my changes.
• I added/updated integration tests for my changes.
• I ran the integration tests.
• I tested my changes in Node ✅ all 18 tests ok
• I tested my changes in Deno ❌ did not manage to run tests with Deno
• I tested my changes in the browser ✅ all 32 tests ok
• I viewed documents produced with my changes in Adobe Acrobat, Foxit Reader, Firefox, and Chrome.
• I added/updated doc comments for any new/modified public APIs.
• My changes work for both new and existing PDF files.
• I ran the linter on my changes.

[Sharcoux]

Thanks for your contribution.

Can you just fix your MR to limit to what is strictly needed to achieve the goal of the PR please? I'll merge after that.

Thanks.

[ussu]

Can you just fix your MR to limit to what is strictly needed to achieve the

sure i split into a few commits:

what i am confident with:

• actually the only change that I want is 5007bbc
• then i suggest adding ea680ba to upgrade the version of typescript
• yarn lint kept making this change 319bbf4

the messy part:

• 2d7966e has a bunch of changes actually related to how fontkit is typed so i'm not sure about this one
• a11e29b maybe reveals an issue with UPNG typing actually i'll try to have a look at UPNG soon