brutal VS minitest

Unless you don't write tests, the advantage of using such DSL interface is to limit the introduction of additional logic into the specification document with potential errors, to encourage the use of good Ruby patterns with low algorithmic complexity, and to make Ruby code shorter and more (machine) readable.

In this part, we’ll set up our testing environment so that we can test our Rails API using minitest with minitest/spec. We’ll look at the differences between traditional style unit tests and spec-style tests, or specs. I’ll demonstrate why you should use minitest-rails. We’ll look at using rack-test for testing our API. We’ll even create our own generator to generate API specs.

I forgot to mention that reading code is also a good way to learn how to write code, it's like inspiration. Check repos of some gems you like. For example sidekiq https://github.com/sidekiq/sidekiq/tree/main/lib/sidekiq Or minitest https://github.com/minitest/minitest/tree/master/lib/minitest

All through GitHub.

1. From https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/6ffb29d24e05abbd9ffe3ea9..., click "Blame" on the header bar over the file contents.

2. Scroll down to the line and click on the commit in the left column.

3. Scroll down to the file that removed the line from its previous file, activesupport/lib/active_support/test_case.rb.

4. Click the three-dots menu in that file's header bar and select "View file".

5. Click "History" in the header bar of the contributors, above the file contents.

6. I guessed here at commit 281f488 on its message: "Use the method provided by minitest to make tests order dependent". There's a comment here that identified the problem which led to, and provided context for, the change in 6ffb29d.

The OP is from minitest's documentation, so to find the introduction in minitest, it's basically the same process.

1. Go to https://github.com/minitest/minitest.

2. Search the repo for the method name. Even just "i_suck" will match the commit.

3. Select the oldest commit in the results. That's a4553e2.

The new test convention is now "test/**/test_*.rb" instead of "test/**/*_test.rb". For example, Puma and Minitest are popular repositories using this naming pattern.

https://github.com/seattlerb/minitest really removed the FUD for me when i started learning Ruby and Rails. Its full of metaprogramming and fancy tricks but is also quite small, practical and informal in its style.

e.g. "assert_equal" is really just "expected == actual" at it's core but it uses both both a block param (a kind of closure) for composing a default message and calls "diff" which is a dumb wrapper around the system "diff" utility (horrors!). There is even some evolved nastiness in there for an API change that uses the existing assert/refute logic to raise an informative message. this is handled with a simple if and not some sort of complex hard-to-follow factory pattern or dependency injection misuse.

https://github.com/seattlerb/minitest/blob/master/lib/minite...

Those are just a few examples of what you can do with Minitest! Check out their README on GitHub and keep on exploring.

One of the things I love the most about Ruby is that it tends to coalesce around one or two really popular libraries. Rails is the big one obviously, but over time you see libraries designed for a particular purpose "winning" over other things. This includes things like linting/code analysis (Rubocop), authentication (Devise), testing (RSpec and Minitest) and more. The emphasis is on making something good great rather than making a lot of different good things.

Then try minitest (unit and spec verisons) https://github.com/seattlerb/minitest