Is there a reason to add this listener? If there is an error in the future I think it would be better to see that error than an AssertionError('must not throw') message.

🤔 and put assert.ifError?
Ok.

It will just throw by default, which will cause the test to fail.

But then you don't get which line... And since there are two almost identical calls it's a PITA (just been there while writing this test)

I see. I think the ifError approach is fine then.

checks for the issue in -> Refs:

Ack

Can you replace the uses of assert.ifError() with common.mustNotCall(). You can provide a custom message with the latter if you'd like.

See #13092 (comment)
@AndreasMadsen suggested that we might want to see the actual error.
(Maybe we need mustNotErr like assert.doesNotThrow)

OK, you might want to use assert.fail() instead. ifError() implies that there might not be an error, but in this case, we know that there is one.

Added a factory method mustNotErr that calls assert.fail so the fail point will appear in the stack

Isn't this redundant?

In a sense yes, I just wanted to be explicit about the pain point.
I could replace this with a comment.

Couldn't you drop the try...catch completely, and if it happens to throw, it will fail the test.

Ack. Replaced with a comment

Sorry if my previous comment was unclear. I just meant to write this as:

Refs: #13045

Ack

I don't understand why you need this. You can just pass assert.fail (without the parens) as the handler, everywhere you use mustNotErr().

Tried it, then there is no frame for the line with the failing assert (Actually the factory is not a solution I need explicit (err) => assert.fail(err))

Generated error by setting port: port + 1
with (err) => assert.fail(err)

assert.js:92
  throw new AssertionError({
  ^

AssertionError [ERR_ASSERTION]: Error: write EPROTO 101057795:error:140770FC:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_SERVER_HELLO:unknown protocol:openssl\ssl\s23_clnt.c:794:

    at ClientRequest.req.on (D:\code\node-cur\test\parallel\test-async-wrap-GH13045.js:63:35)
    at emitOne (events.js:115:13)
    at ClientRequest.emit (events.js:210:7)
    at TLSSocket.socketErrorListener (_http_client.js:397:9)
    at emitOne (events.js:115:13)
    at TLSSocket.emit (events.js:210:7)
    at onwriteError (_stream_writable.js:359:10)
    at onwrite (_stream_writable.js:377:5)
    at fireErrorCallbacks (net.js:522:13)
    at TLSSocket.Socket._destroy (net.js:563:3)

with just assert.fail

assert.js:92
  throw new AssertionError({
  ^

AssertionError [ERR_ASSERTION]: Error: write EPROTO 101057795:error:140770FC:SSL routines:SSL23_GET_SERVER_HELLO:unknown protocol:openssl\ssl\s23_clnt.c:794:

    at emitOne (events.js:115:13)
    at ClientRequest.emit (events.js:210:7)
    at TLSSocket.socketErrorListener (_http_client.js:397:9)
    at emitOne (events.js:115:13)
    at TLSSocket.emit (events.js:210:7)
    at onwriteError (_stream_writable.js:359:10)
    at onwrite (_stream_writable.js:377:5)
    at fireErrorCallbacks (net.js:522:13)
    at TLSSocket.Socket._destroy (net.js:563:3)
    at WriteWrap.afterWrite [as oncomplete] (net.js:857:10)

Isn't this more or less equivalent to just not adding an 'error' listener? Similarly with the 'error' handlers above.

See #13092 (comment) and #13092 (comment)

In that case, I'm -0 on it.

Add the response handler as a second argument here for consistency?

Ditto about switching to https.get().

ack, ack.

common.mustCall((req, res) => { ... }, 2) ?

ack.

Are these last two options necessary?

Just last one: AssertionError [ERR_ASSERTION]: Error: self signed certificate in certificate chain

I think method: 'GET' could be dropped and .request() changed to .get() to avoid the need to req.end().

ack

This isn't needed, it's even the default.

ack