Hotfix for #2051

[drug007]

Hot fix #2051

[dlang-bot]

Thanks for your pull request and interest in making D better, @drug007! We are looking forward to reviewing it, and you should be hearing from a maintainer soon.
Please verify that your PR follows this checklist:

• My PR is fully covered with tests (you can see the coverage diff by visiting the details link of the codecov check)
• My PR is as minimal as possible (smaller, focused PRs are easier to review than big ones)
• I have provided a detailed rationale explaining my changes
• New or modified functions have Ddoc comments (with Params: and Returns:)

Please see CONTRIBUTING.md for more information.

---

If you have addressed all reviews or aren't sure how to proceed, don't hesitate to ping us with a simple comment.

[drug007]

The PR makes dub test command run unit tests in the main source file in case of single file package (by default dub excludes them). The second test was added to make sure that unit tests run in fact.

[thewilsonator]

It seems you removed an _ from the test files name, creating a large diff. Please put it back to make reviewing easier.

[drug007]

Ok, I'll do renaming in another PR then (to conform to other file names).

[drug007]

Rebased the branch

[drug007]

@thewilsonator between what is preferable - many small specific commits like I did or one large commit like it was told in other PRs I saw?

[thewilsonator]

Specifically in this case, file renames in separate PRs is preferable.

[drug007]

I've realized that GitHub is not able to handle renaming gracefully and shows both files separately that makes review very difficult. My question is more about is splitting a PR to many small commits better than one single large commit? For me it's much easier to review step by step by means of small, clean and dedicated commits than one large commit with all changes at once but I saw in other PRs the advice to squash all commits so I'm curious what approach is better here?