I just worked through the Cars, Assemble exercise and encountered something that I think of as a unit test anti-pattern.
In the current implementation the assertions that compare doubles are in the form:
assertThat(Math.abs(carsAssemble.productionRatePerHour(9) - 1591.2) < epsilon).isTrue();
which means when the test fails the student gets an unhelpful message:
"Expecting: <false> to be equal to <true> but was not."
I thought it was standard to use the AreEquals double-with-delta form:
Assertions.assertEquals(1591.2, carsAssemble.productionRatePerHour(9), epsilon);
which reports the same failure in a more informative way:
The C# track does seem to have the more informative test pattern:
Assert.Equal(1591.2, AssemblyLine.ProductionRatePerHour(9), precision: 1);
I’ll make the changes if it’s worth updating - I did convert the tests locally when solving to get the added information anyways