chore(binding-opcua): enable strict type checking

[danielpeintner]

another one of #758

Note: since at the moment I am not able to test OPCUA locally due to network/company restriction I will use the CI for testing.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 45.45% and project coverage change: -0.10% ⚠️

Comparison is base (3a74512) 75.38% compared to head (732baa6) 75.28%.
Report is 5 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1057      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   75.38%   75.28%   -0.10%     
==========================================
  Files          80       80              
  Lines       15443    15455      +12     
  Branches     1477     1481       +4     
==========================================
- Hits        11641    11636       -5     
- Misses       3766     3783      +17     
  Partials       36       36              

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
...ackages/binding-opcua/src/opcua-protocol-client.ts	79.90% <23.07%> (-1.14%)	⬇️
packages/binding-opcua/src/codec.ts	86.94% <77.77%> (-0.09%)	⬇️

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[danielpeintner]

I think the PR is now ready for review...

@erossignon may I ask you to take a look?
Maybe you can also explain the reason for #1057 (review)

[danielpeintner]

@erossignon seems to be busy. Anyhow, the changes seem simple enough to go on... what do others think?

[relu91]

Thinking on the point, the only reason that I see to clone dataValue might be to sanitize the Object and remove functions and methods. Can we still keep this conversion and mark it as an issue? 🤔

Just to keep the current idempotent with the previous implementation.

[danielpeintner]

Just to keep the current idempotent with the previous implementation.

Yes, let's keep it as it was, see 732baa6
I don't think an issue is really needed.

[relu91]

Good to go

[erossignon]

Sorry, I didn't find time to look into this; but you did well any, we can always look at why this JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(opcuaJsonEncodeDataValue(dataValue, true))); is needed.
I think we can simplify this with the most recent version node-opcua-json package that improved the opcuaJsonEncodeDataValue. but that's a different story.
I'll propose a PR.