Mineunit tests

[S-S-X]

Basic tests also showing bit more proper fixture use mentioned at #2 (comment)

API is used in fixture, that's not exactly correct use and API call should be in spec instead but I guess you'll get the idea.

• Wrench
  • bitchange:shop
    • can be picked up
    • correctly placed after picked up
  • default:cobble
    • cannot be picked up
  • no-op tool use
    • works pointing nothing

There's no coverage reporting or any comments added by bot if tests pass, failure comment is added with test logs if tests fail.

There's a lot of commits because this branch is currently based on wrench_support_extend
All stuff is really in this single commit: 3334803
Changed base branch to be wrench_support_extend, if merged this can however be merged directly into master after #2 is done. I do recommend that because #2 is huge mixed changes already, bit over sized PR already.

[S-S-X]

Well yeah, also this depends on unreleased Mineunit updates: S-S-X/mineunit#67
Will prob merge that soon too. ✔️ done

[OgelGames]

Is this really needed? I think manual testing is enough for a single tool.

[S-S-X]

Is this really needed? I think manual testing is enough for a single tool.

No, automated testing of course is not needed. It is just to catch errors and skip a lot of manual testing.

[OgelGames]

I had a closer look at this, and it only tests the core functionality of the wrench - something that isn't likely to change at all, especially not frequently enough to need automated tests.

[S-S-X]

I had a closer look at this, and it only tests the core functionality of the wrench - something that isn't likely to change at all, especially not frequently enough to need automated tests.

That sound very ignorant especially because things that are not supposed to change are exactly ones you do create automated tests.

[S-S-X]

I've reopened this because there was one approval already. It tells that one people does not like it while apparently at least 2, possibly 3 agrees (judging by reactions and approvals).

[SwissalpS]

I also think unit tests are good to confirm that core functionality has not changed with possibly irrelevant looking additions.
The additions should also get tests because next editor will not remember to test everything manually each time.

Sometimes unit tests seem irrelevant and redundant as one has just written the code and the test with same mindset in mind.
However, they can catch errors just as luacheck catches syntax errors or unused vars etc.