Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 7934435
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 3, 20262026-06-03T21:38:45+00:00 2026-06-03T21:38:45+00:00

I read somewhere that ‘minitest’ is the new test::unit for ruby 1.9.2+. But ruby

  • 0

I read somewhere that ‘minitest’ is the “new test::unit for ruby 1.9.2+”.

But ruby 1.9.3 seems to include both test::unit and minitest, is that true?

In the default rails testing, as outlined in the Rails testing guide…. things like ActiveSupport::TestCase, ActionController::TestCase, are these using Test::Unit or Minitest?

In the rails guide, it shows examples with tests defined like this:

test "should show post" do
  get :show, :id => @post.id
  assert_response :success
end

That syntax, test string, as opposed to defining methods with names like test_something — isn’t mentioned in the docs for either Test::Unit or Minitest. Where’s that coming from? Is Rails adding it, or is it actually a part of… whatever testing lib rails is using?

PS: Please don’t tell me “just use rspec”. I know about rspec. I am trying to explore the stdlib alternatives, in the context of rails.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-03T21:38:47+00:00Added an answer on June 3, 2026 at 9:38 pm

    There is a Test::Unit "compatibility" module that comes with Minitest, so that you can (presumably) use your existing Test::Unit tests as-is. This is probably the Test::Unit module you are seeing.

    As of rails 3.2.3, generator-created tests include rails/test_help which includes test/unit.

    The test "something" do syntax is a rails extension. It’s defined in ActiveSupport::Testing::Declarative, which is require‘d by rails/test_help.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I read somewhere that somebody could access a config value during run time but
I have read somewhere that HashMap uses chaining to resolve collisions. But if that
I read somewhere that ruby threads/fibre block the IO even with 1.9. Is this
I read somewhere that config data is stored under user account->Local Settings->Application data, but
I read somewhere that the isset() function treats an empty string as TRUE ,
I read somewhere that : var o = new Array(); is in effect doing
I read somewhere that NTP is based on UDP and there's no security built
I read somewhere that one should never use error conditions as normal program flow.
I read somewhere that the ?: operator in C is slightly different in C++,
I read somewhere that Pattern Matching like that supported by the match/case feature in

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.