I often find it interesting the propensity to name things. In my opinion, this approach should be self-evident once the concept of unit tests is correctly under

I often find it interesting the propensity to name things. In my opinion, this approach should be self-evident once the concept of unit tests is correctly understood - prepare the data, run the code, check the output. I suppose this is another case where a common approach is given a name so that people can refer to it to each other and pass it onto others. I wouldn't have thought to name this one, though - I would rather teach a junior engineer how to think about what a test should do, instead of telling him to do "AAA". With experience, I have seen the effect of something being given a name eventually leading to less experienced people treating it as a universal principle and wielding it as if all they have is a hammer, perhaps before having formed the habits of checking assumptions before making decisions, etc.