feat Adding support for set -e and set -x

[prsabahrami]

Added support for set -e

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 42.55319% with 27 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 62.23%. Comparing base (cc84630) to head (f90b8ed).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
crates/shell/src/commands/set.rs	0.00%	16 Missing ⚠️
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/commands/args.rs	33.33%	6 Missing ⚠️
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/types.rs	50.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/commands/sleep.rs	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #181      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   62.64%   62.23%   -0.42%     
==========================================
  Files          30       31       +1     
  Lines        3183     3217      +34     
==========================================
+ Hits         1994     2002       +8     
- Misses       1189     1215      +26     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/command.rs	34.75% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/commands/cp_mv.rs	95.34% <ø> (+0.77%)	⬆️
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/commands/head.rs	84.72% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/commands/mkdir.rs	97.05% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/commands/mod.rs	97.61% <ø> (ø)
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/commands/pwd.rs	95.83% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/commands/rm.rs	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/commands/xargs.rs	56.73% <100.00%> (ø)
crates/deno_task_shell/src/shell/execute.rs	75.13% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
crates/shell/src/commands/mod.rs	41.66% <100.00%> (+2.01%)	⬆️
... and 4 more

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[certik]

Excellent, thanks for working on this! We need this.

Let's figure out how to test it.

Also, I think the default should be "set -e" (exit on error), but you can turn it off with "set +e". That deviates from the default Bash behavior, however since it makes it more strict, I think it might be fine. It still leaves the door open to later relax it if we decide it should not be the default. Looking at all my scripts, I think I've always needed "set -e". @wolfv what do you think the default should be?

[prsabahrami]

It would be quite simple to change default. Also, very fair point, I think having it enabled would be more useful.
I yet to test this behaves exactly as expected especially in if statements and add tests hence leaving it as a draft.
Let me know if you figured out a way to properly test this but as for start, we can add scripts for testing.

[certik]

One way to test it is like this. With set +x:

# something that fails
# something that succeeds

I think in Bash the whole script should succeed (we should check). While with set -x the script should fail in Bash. So we can simply check the return value of the script and ensure it is 0 with set +x and non-zero with set -x.