GeezerVison

Hi, @juanarbol! Welcome and thanks for the pull request! The change is fine, I guess, but it's not clear to me that this is a significant improvement over the existing code. Curious to get the opinion of other collaborators.

I took idea from Nodetodo, just make more clear an specific test. It's quite hard find anything to help ☹️

I took idea from Nodetodo

I'm not sure what you mean. There's nothing on the Node Todo website that suggests that introducing destructuring in a situation like this is desirable. Can you point me to where you got the suggestion?

It's quite hard find anything to help

I'll email you a suggested task.

Sure, I saw this commit in Nodetodo's list (Commits From NodeTodo Activities), it's kind of a code refactor of a particular unit test. I read some test files and found almost same "problem" in this particular file changed on this commit (mine), It's like an inspiration, I guess.
Thanks for reviewing! Feels so good haha

Sure, I saw this commit in Nodetodo's list

Ah, I see. That commit uses destructuring to replace assigning a property to a variable. This change, though, replaces a require() without a property being assigned. The former arguably improves readability. I'm not sure this has the same effect.

CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/18894/

Resume CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/18903/

Landed in e0893f0

Thanks for the contribution! 🎉

(If you're interested in other possible contributions to Node.js but don't have a good idea of where to start looking, some ideas are posted at https://www.nodetodo.org/next-steps/.)