Upgrade typehints to 3.10 annotations and remove 3.9 Union and Optional typehints

[Vizonex]

What do these changes do?

3.9 was dropped recently so I've chosen to upgrade the annotations away from 3.9 and into 3.10 which includes new the popular pipe syntax instead of Union[A, B] or Optional[A] in favor of A | B A | None instead.

Are there changes in behavior for the user?

Users will likely enjoy the changes from the new 3.10 annotations over the older Union and Optional type hints especially since these types are both deprecated.

Related issue number

This pull request is related to changes from #1316

Checklist

• I think the code is well written
• Unit tests for the changes exist
• Documentation reflects the changes

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 245 untouched benchmarks

---

_{Comparing Vizonex:py310-upgrade (1439ee8) with master (637ffa9)}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 99.86%. Comparing base (637ffa9) to head (1439ee8).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1324   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.86%   99.86%           
=======================================
  Files          28       28           
  Lines        3607     3607           
  Branches      265      265           
=======================================
  Hits         3602     3602           
  Misses          3        3           
  Partials        2        2           

Flag	Coverage Δ
CI-GHA	99.86% <100.00%> (ø)
pytest	99.86% <100.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[bdraco]

Looks like we are missing pyupgrade on this repo

[Vizonex]

Looks like we are missing pyupgrade on this repo

@bdraco do you have any ideas of how we should go about doing something like that? I was thinking about implementing a few flags within ruff to get something like that to work.