feat: add method name formatter option for client handlers

[thiagodeev]

Solves #136

This PR allows a user to specify a method name formatter for a client handler on the client side.
Although we can create a client handler to accept reversed calls from the server, it wasn't possible to configure a method name format for it (like WithMethodNameFormatter). This restricts the use of reverse calls to the default method name formatter, so it wasn't possible to accept a reverse call with a different method name format (like the eth_subscription method name).

Note: while creating a test for this new method, I studied other tests and found an undocumented feature: method name alias. This can also solve the above issue, but it requires creating an alias for every method name. The new solution proposed by this PR is applied to the entire client handler. I've updated the docs to improve DX.

Note: in the server, the formatter specified by the WithServerMethodNameFormatter config is also applied to the reverse calls. Do you want me to change this?

Regards

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
⚠️ Please upload report for BASE (master@bbbae86). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master     #138   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   72.39%           
=========================================
  Files             ?       13           
  Lines             ?     2003           
  Branches          ?        0           
=========================================
  Hits              ?     1450           
  Misses            ?      453           
  Partials          ?      100           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
client.go	79.95% <100.00%> (ø)
options.go	70.31% <100.00%> (ø)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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

[BigLep]

Thanks for the contribution @thiagodeev . Just letting you know it may be a couple of weeks before maintainers can get to this given other balls that are being juggled currently.