Guard against invalid key names

[jacobperron]

In particular, guard against keys that only consist of whitespace and '/' characters.
The error message is also improved slightly.

Fixes #113

[jacobperron]

• Linux
• Linux-aarch64
• macOS
• Windows

[mikaelarguedas]

This was written at the time where node namespace / names conventions were not enforced.
I don't think it's necessarily a good idea /maintainable to extend this custom logic to cover a single new specific case.
Would it be possible to leverage/provide code allowing to validate node namespace/name instead? something like https://github.com/ros2/rmw/blob/master/rmw/include/rmw/validate_node_name.h

[jacobperron]

Good idea. Considering this is a Python package, what do you think about depending on rclpy, which has functions for validating node names and namespaces?

[mikaelarguedas]

That sounds good 👍

What looks like the ideal outcome would be to have these utilities in a separate package and be used by both rclpy and sros2 (or any other tool needing them).
A commandline argument added here allowing to bypass the check could be valuable as well (imagining people writing pure DDS code and leveraging sros2 to generate their artifacts).

As this is more work (and would require to preserve the rclpy API if fix for Dashing) than directly using the rclpy functions, it may make sense to just do that for now and ticket the remaining items for a later date.

[jacobperron]

What's wrong with leaving the validation functions in rclpy? It seems to me that if any other Python tool wants to validate ROS names then the Python ROS client library would be the package to rely on.
I'm not sure what we'd call the new package containing the name validation functions.

[jacobperron]

Now using rclpy functions for name validation.

• Linux
• Linux-aarch64
• macOS
• Windows

[mikaelarguedas]

It seems to me that if any other Python tool wants to validate ROS names then the Python ROS client library would be the package to rely on.

That's a good point 👍
lgtm as is then