iox-#1032 replace 'IOX_EXPECTS'/'IOX_ENSURES' with 'IOX_ENFORCE'

[elBoberido]

Pre-Review Checklist for the PR Author

1. Add a second reviewer for complex new features or larger refactorings
2. Code follows the coding style of CONTRIBUTING.md
3. Tests follow the best practice for testing
4. [ ] Changelog updated in the unreleased section including API breaking changes
5. Branch follows the naming format (iox-123-this-is-a-branch)
6. Commits messages are according to this guideline
   • Commit messages have the issue ID (iox-#123 commit text)
   • Commit author matches Eclipse Contributor Agreement (and ECA is signed)
7. Update the PR title
   • Follow the same conventions as for commit messages
   • Link to the relevant issue
8. Relevant issues are linked
9. Add sensible notes for the reviewer
10. All checks have passed (except task-list-completed)
11. All touched (C/C++) source code files from iceoryx_hoofs are added to ./clang-tidy-diff-scans.txt
12. Assign PR to reviewer

Notes for Reviewer

This PR replaces the legacy error handler macros ('IOX_ENFORCE' and 'IOX_EXPECTS') with the new IOX_ENFORCE macro and adjusts the tests. Additionally, the error output is improved.

The changelog will be updated with the next PR which also removes all the TODOs and updates the error handling md files.

Checklist for the PR Reviewer

• Commits are properly organized and messages are according to the guideline
• Code according to our coding style and naming conventions
• Unit tests have been written for new behavior
• Public API changes are documented via doxygen
• Copyright owner are updated in the changed files
• All touched (C/C++) source code files from iceoryx_hoofs have been added to ./clang-tidy-diff-scans.txt
• PR title describes the changes

Post-review Checklist for the PR Author

1. All open points are addressed and tracked via issues

References

• Relates to ErrorHandling concept with user defined actions #1032
• Relates to Ongoing Issue: CI Maintenance Tasks #2011

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 86 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (80bbdf9) 80.06% compared to head (5866693) 79.97%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2181      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   80.06%   79.97%   -0.10%     
==========================================
  Files         421      420       -1     
  Lines       16361    16362       +1     
  Branches     2270     2275       +5     
==========================================
- Hits        13099    13085      -14     
- Misses       2419     2439      +20     
+ Partials      843      838       -5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	79.76% <79.02%> (-0.10%)	⬇️
unittests_timing	15.45% <19.75%> (-0.04%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files	Coverage Δ
iceoryx_binding_c/source/c_chunk.cpp	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx_binding_c/source/c_client.cpp	97.91% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx_binding_c/source/c_node.cpp	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx_binding_c/source/c_notification_info.cpp	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx_binding_c/source/c_publisher.cpp	92.50% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx_binding_c/source/c_request_header.cpp	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx_binding_c/source/c_response_header.cpp	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx_binding_c/source/c_runtime.cpp	80.00% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx_binding_c/source/c_server.cpp	96.11% <100.00%> (ø)
iceoryx_binding_c/source/c_service_discovery.cpp	98.38% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 50 more

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[elBoberido]

@FerdinandSpitzschnueffler @mossmaurice @dkroenke @MatthiasKillat @budrus @elfenpiff feel free to add yourself as reviewer

[FerdinandSpitzschnueffler]

Some nitpicks...