StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. DevOps
  3. Testing Frameworks
  4. Testing Frameworks
  5. RSpec vs pytest

RSpec vs pytest

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

RSpec
RSpec
Stacks3.5K
Followers200
Votes0
GitHub Stars76
Forks29
pytest
pytest
Stacks4.0K
Followers306
Votes0
GitHub Stars13.2K
Forks2.9K

RSpec vs pytest: What are the differences?

Introduction:

1. Syntax: The syntax of RSpec and pytest differ significantly. RSpec uses Ruby syntax, incorporating human-readable elements like 'describe' and 'it', which promotes writing expressive and readable test cases. On the other hand, pytest follows a more concise and Pythonic syntax, utilizing decorators such as 'pytest.fixture' and 'pytest.mark' to define test functions and attributes.

2. Fixture Management: One key difference lies in how fixtures, which provide a fixed baseline for tests, are handled. RSpec provides 'before' and 'after' blocks for setting up and tearing down fixtures respectively, while pytest offers a more flexible fixture system using fixtures defined as functions or decorators, making it easier to manage and reuse fixtures across multiple test cases.

3. Mocking and Assertions: RSpec includes built-in mocking and stubbing functionalities, allowing users to replace method implementations in tests. Additionally, RSpec features extensive built-in matchers for making assertions, enhancing the readability of tests. In contrast, pytest relies on third-party libraries like 'unittest.mock' for mocking objects and assertions, providing flexibility but requiring additional setup.

4. Test Discovery and Execution: Pytest excels in test discovery and execution, automatically identifying and running test functions without the need for explicit configuration. It also offers parallel test execution for faster testing cycles. RSpec, on the other hand, relies on more explicit configuration and naming conventions for test discovery, which may require additional setup and maintenance.

5. Plugin Ecosystem: Pytest boasts a robust plugin ecosystem with a wide array of third-party plugins for extending its functionality, such as code coverage, parallel testing, and test parameterization. RSpec, while offering some customization options, has a more limited plugin ecosystem, potentially restricting the user's ability to enhance their testing capabilities.

6. Community and Documentation: Pytest benefits from a larger and more active community, resulting in extensive documentation, tutorials, and online resources readily available to users. This strong community support makes it easier for users to troubleshoot issues and collaborate with others. RSpec, while well-established, may have fewer resources and community support compared to pytest.

Summary: In summary, the key differences between RSpec and pytest lie in their syntax, fixture management, mocking capabilities, test discovery, plugin ecosystem, and community support.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

RSpec
RSpec
pytest
pytest

Behaviour Driven Development for Ruby. Making TDD Productive and Fun.

A framework makes it easy to write small tests, yet scales to support complex functional testing for applications and libraries. It is a mature full-featured Python testing tool.

-
Auto-discovery; Modular fixtures
Statistics
GitHub Stars
76
GitHub Stars
13.2K
GitHub Forks
29
GitHub Forks
2.9K
Stacks
3.5K
Stacks
4.0K
Followers
200
Followers
306
Votes
0
Votes
0
Integrations
No integrations available
PyCharm
PyCharm

What are some alternatives to RSpec, pytest?

Robot Framework

Robot Framework

It is a generic test automation framework for acceptance testing and acceptance test-driven development. It has easy-to-use tabular test data syntax and it utilizes the keyword-driven testing approach. Its testing capabilities can be extended by test libraries implemented either with Python or Java, and users can create new higher-level keywords from existing ones using the same syntax that is used for creating test cases.

Karate DSL

Karate DSL

Combines API test-automation, mocks and performance-testing into a single, unified framework. The BDD syntax popularized by Cucumber is language-neutral, and easy for even non-programmers. Besides powerful JSON & XML assertions, you can run tests in parallel for speed - which is critical for HTTP API testing.

Cucumber

Cucumber

Cucumber is a tool that supports Behaviour-Driven Development (BDD) - a software development process that aims to enhance software quality and reduce maintenance costs.

TestCafe

TestCafe

It is a pure node.js end-to-end solution for testing web apps. It takes care of all the stages: starting browsers, running tests, gathering test results and generating reports.

Spock Framework

Spock Framework

It is a testing and specification framework for Java and Groovy applications. What makes it stand out from the crowd is its beautiful and highly expressive specification language. It is compatible with most IDEs, build tools, and continuous integration servers.

Selenide

Selenide

It is a library for writing concise, readable, boilerplate-free tests in Java using Selenium WebDriver.

Capybara

Capybara

Capybara helps you test web applications by simulating how a real user would interact with your app. It is agnostic about the driver running your tests and comes with Rack::Test and Selenium support built in. WebKit is supported through an external gem.

PHPUnit

PHPUnit

PHPUnit is a programmer-oriented testing framework for PHP. It is an instance of the xUnit architecture for unit testing frameworks.

Detox

Detox

High velocity native mobile development requires us to adopt continuous integration workflows, which means our reliance on manual QA has to drop significantly. It tests your mobile app while it's running in a real device/simulator, interacting with it just like a real user.

Imagium

Imagium

Imagium provides AI based visual testing solution for various forms of testing. It makes the job easier for QA Automation, Mobile Testers, DevOps and Compliance teams. Imagium is easy to integrate with any programing language

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana