cli: allow unary-negated eval arguments

[jorgitin02]

Fixes: #43397

Summary

• treat unary-negated eval inputs as expressions (e.g. -42, -0, -NaN) instead of missing option args
• preserve option safety so -e -p still reports missing eval argument
• add regression coverage in test/parallel/test-cli-eval.js for unary-negation and nearby safety paths

Testing

• python3 tools/test.py test/parallel/test-cli-eval.js
• python3 tools/test.py --repeat=5 test/parallel/test-cli-eval.js
• python3 tools/test.py test/parallel/test-cli-eval.js test/parallel/test-cli-bad-options.js
• make lint-cpp
• make lint-js NODE=$(command -v node)
• scripts/agent-preflight.sh

[mcollina]

lgtm

[nodejs-github-bot]

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/71431/

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 31.81818% with 15 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 89.73%. Comparing base (da5efc4) to head (2086d8c).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/node_options-inl.h	31.81%	7 Missing and 8 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #61962      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   88.84%   89.73%   +0.89%     
==========================================
  Files         674      672       -2     
  Lines      204957   204545     -412     
  Branches    39309    39276      -33     
==========================================
+ Hits       182087   183557    +1470     
+ Misses      15088    13306    -1782     
+ Partials     7782     7682     -100     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/node_options-inl.h	79.92% <31.81%> (-3.21%)	⬇️

... and 122 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[addaleax]

From the ticket:

For users who prefer setting mandatory option arguments rather than positional arguments, node --print --eval=-42 already works. :)

I think that's the right solution here. Adding behavior that depends on the specific text passed to the flag is going to be dangerous; now you cannot know anymore whether node -e -<text> will work or throw, it's going to depend on the specific value of text (i.e. the behavior is less consistent now, not more).