Fix consistency of QNode results processing

[andrijapau]

Context:

The output of QNode execution was not consistent based on the type of the qfunc output,

@qml.qnode(qml.device('default.qubit'))
def circuit(t):
    return t([qml.expval(qml.Z(0))])
>>> circuit(tuple)
1.0
>>> circuit(list)
[1.0]

Description of the Change:

Updates how the results of the QNode execution gets "type-converted" according to the qfunc_output.

After this fix we get consistency,

@qml.qnode(qml.device('default.qubit'))
def circuit(t):
    return t([qml.expval(qml.Z(0))])
>>> circuit(tuple)
(1.0,)
>>> circuit(list)
[1.0]

Benefits: Consistency

Possible Drawbacks: Output of QNode execution may look different than people are used to. A direct example is needed to change some tests to squeeze out the new dimension that has been introduced.

Related GitHub Issue: Fixes #6540

[sc-77682]

[github-actions]

Hello. You may have forgotten to update the changelog!
Please edit doc/releases/changelog-dev.md with:

• A one-to-two sentence description of the change. You may include a small working example for new features.
• A link back to this PR.
• Your name (or GitHub username) in the contributors section.

[albi3ro]

❤️

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.45%. Comparing base (08e694f) to head (4336b4c).
Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #6568   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.45%   99.45%           
=======================================
  Files         451      451           
  Lines       42293    42293           
=======================================
  Hits        42062    42062           
  Misses        231      231           

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

---

🚨 Try these New Features:

• Flaky Tests Detection - Detect and resolve failed and flaky tests

[JerryChen97]

I guess we should permanently turn off the too-many-positional of codefac