chore: Tracing Sanitize SegmentName to avoid unsupported characters

[hjgraca]

Please provide the issue number

Issue number: #740

Summary

Changes

1. Sanitize SegmentName
2. Show accepted chars in the SegmentName

This pull request introduces several changes to the AWS Lambda Powertools Tracing library, primarily focusing on sanitizing segment names and updating related tests. The most important changes include the addition of a helper method for sanitizing strings, modifications to the XRayRecorder and TracingAttribute classes to use this sanitization, and the addition of new test cases to ensure the changes work correctly.

Sanitization of Segment Names:

• libraries/src/AWS.Lambda.Powertools.Tracing/Internal/Helpers.cs: Added a new static Helpers class with a SanitizeString method to remove any characters that are not alphanumeric, whitespace, or one of the following: _ . : / % & # = + - @.
• libraries/src/AWS.Lambda.Powertools.Tracing/Internal/XRayRecorder.cs: Updated the BeginSubsegment method to use Helpers.SanitizeString for sanitizing the segment name.

Documentation and Attribute Updates:

• libraries/src/AWS.Lambda.Powertools.Tracing/TracingAttribute.cs: Updated the documentation for the SegmentName property to specify the allowed characters in segment names.

Test Enhancements:

• libraries/tests/AWS.Lambda.Powertools.Tracing.Tests/Handlers/Handlers.cs: Added new methods HandleWithInvalidSegmentName and MethodWithInvalidSegmentName to test the handling of invalid segment names.
• libraries/tests/AWS.Lambda.Powertools.Tracing.Tests/TracingAttributeTest.cs: Added a new test OnEntry_WhenSegmentName_Is_Unsupported to verify that the segment names are sanitized correctly.

User experience

Please share what the user experience looks like before and after this change

Checklist

Please leave checklist items unchecked if they do not apply to your change.

• Meets tenets criteria
• I have performed a self-review of this change
• Changes have been tested
• Changes are documented
• PR title follows conventional commit semantics

Is this a breaking change?

RFC issue number:

Checklist:

• Migration process documented
• Implement warnings (if it can live side by side)

Acknowledgment

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

Disclaimer: We value your time and bandwidth. As such, any pull requests created on non-triaged issues might not be successful.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 73.34%. Comparing base (5f17cc2) to head (2ac7b48).
Report is 23 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop     #741      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    73.32%   73.34%   +0.01%     
===========================================
  Files          200      201       +1     
  Lines         8112     8118       +6     
  Branches       871      871              
===========================================
+ Hits          5948     5954       +6     
  Misses        1875     1875              
  Partials       289      289              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	73.34% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️

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.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[leandrodamascena]

Nice improvement! If testes are green - I saw the new test - it's good to merge.

[hjgraca]

CC @nCubed