Alternatives to QUnit logo

Alternatives to QUnit

Mocha, Jest, Jasmine, JUnit, and Selenium are the most popular alternatives and competitors to QUnit.
874
83
+ 1
17

What is QUnit and what are its top alternatives?

QUnit is a powerful, easy-to-use JavaScript unit testing framework. It's used by the jQuery, jQuery UI and jQuery Mobile projects and is capable of testing any generic JavaScript code, including itself!
QUnit is a tool in the Javascript Testing Framework category of a tech stack.
QUnit is an open source tool with GitHub stars and GitHub forks. Here’s a link to QUnit's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to QUnit

  • Mocha
    Mocha

    Mocha is a feature-rich JavaScript test framework running on node.js and the browser, making asynchronous testing simple and fun. Mocha tests run serially, allowing for flexible and accurate reporting, while mapping uncaught exceptions to the correct test cases. ...

  • Jest
    Jest

    Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine.

  • Jasmine
    Jasmine

    Jasmine is a Behavior Driven Development testing framework for JavaScript. It does not rely on browsers, DOM, or any JavaScript framework. Thus it's suited for websites, Node.js projects, or anywhere that JavaScript can run. ...

  • JUnit
    JUnit

    JUnit is a simple framework to write repeatable tests. It is an instance of the xUnit architecture for unit testing frameworks. ...

  • Selenium
    Selenium

    Selenium automates browsers. That's it! What you do with that power is entirely up to you. Primarily, it is for automating web applications for testing purposes, but is certainly not limited to just that. Boring web-based administration tasks can (and should!) also be automated as well. ...

  • Chai
    Chai

    It is a BDD / TDD assertion library for node and the browser that can be delightfully paired with any javascript testing framework. It has several interfaces that allow the developer to choose the most comfortable. The chain-capable BDD styles provide an expressive language & readable style, while the TDD assert style provides a more classical feel. ...

  • SinonJS
    SinonJS

    It is a really helpful library when you want to unit test your code. It supports spies, stubs, and mocks. The library has cross browser support and also can run on the server using Node.js. ...

  • Cypress
    Cypress

    Cypress is a front end automated testing application created for the modern web. Cypress is built on a new architecture and runs in the same run-loop as the application being tested. As a result Cypress provides better, faster, and more reliable testing for anything that runs in a browser. Cypress works on any front-end framework or website. ...

QUnit alternatives & related posts

Mocha logo

Mocha

10.4K
2.8K
430
Simple, flexible, fun javascript test framework for node.js & the browser
10.4K
2.8K
+ 1
430
PROS OF MOCHA
  • 137
    Open source
  • 102
    Simple
  • 81
    Promise support
  • 48
    Flexible
  • 29
    Easy to add support for Generators
  • 12
    For browser and server testing
  • 7
    Curstom assertion libraries
  • 5
    Works with Karma
  • 3
    No other better tools
  • 1
    Simple setup
  • 1
    Works with saucelabs
  • 1
    Lots of tutorials and help online
  • 1
    Default reporter is nice, clean, and itemized
  • 1
    Works with BrowserStack
  • 1
    Simple integration testing
CONS OF MOCHA
  • 3
    Cannot test a promisified functions without assertion
  • 2
    No assertion count in results
  • 1
    Not as many reporter options as Jest

related Mocha posts

I use both mocha and Jest because:

  • I don't care whether teams use Jest or Mocha. But jest is way too overhyped. Most devs are writing integration tests and think that it's so much better but frankly I don't write integration tests as the way to get both design feedback and confidence when I code. I adhere to the test pyramid, not ice cream cone or the dumb "trophy"

  • I TDD, so I only ever use the "API" of test frameworks. I don't do a lot of integration tests for TDD and all the bells and whistles Jest provides you from the command-line I just don't need. And I certainly do not care about or touch Jest Snapshots, I despise them

  • My tests are fast enough because I write isolated tests with TDD, so I don't run into performance issues. Example: I write my tests in a way that I can run 300 tests in literally 1 second with mocha. So the Jest ability to pinpoint and only run those tests which are affected by code changes. I want to run all of them every time when I TDD. It's a different mindset when you TDD

  • I also mainly code in IntelliJ or WebStorm because I feel the tools in that IDE far surpass VSCode and I also love running the test UI runner in it vs. lousy command-line

  • I feel both mocha and Jest read just fine in terms of code readability. Jest might have shorter assertion syntax but I don't really care. I just care that I can read the damn test and my tests are written well and my test descriptions, as well as the code itself including constants represent business language, not technical. I care most about BDD, clean code, 4 rules of simple design, and SOLID

  • I don't like using mock frameworks so no I don't use Jest's Mocking framework. I don't have to mock a lot in my tests due to the nature of how I strive to code...I keep my design simple and modular using principals such as clean code and 4 rules of simple design. If I must mock, I create very simple custom mocks with JS

  • On the contrary to the belief that integration tests and mount are the way to go (this belief drives me absolutely crazy, especially Dodd's promoting that), I TDD with shallow & enzyme. My tests are simple. My design is driven by my tests and my tests give me quick and useful feedback. I have a course I'm working on coming out soon on TDD with React to show you how to truly test the FE and why the ice cream cone and trophy suck (you're being scammed people). Watch for that here: https://twitter.com/DaveSchinkel/status/1062267649235791873

Don't forget to upvote this post!

Mocha Jest JavaScript React @jsdom Enzyme #tdd #bdd #testdrivendevelopment

See more
Jack Graves

We use JUnit and Jest to perform the bulk of our automated test scenarios, with additional work with Apache JMeter for performance testing - for example, the Atlassian Data Center compliance testing is performed with JMeter. Jest provides testing for the React interfaces, which make up the backend of our App offerings. JUnit is used for Unit Testing our Server-based Apps. Mocha is another tool we use.

See more
Jest logo

Jest

14.1K
3.8K
175
Painless JavaScript Unit Testing
14.1K
3.8K
+ 1
175
PROS OF JEST
  • 36
    Open source
  • 32
    Mock by default makes testing much simpler
  • 23
    Testing React Native Apps
  • 20
    Parallel test running
  • 16
    Fast
  • 13
    Bundled with JSDOM to enable DOM testing
  • 8
    Mock by default screws up your classes, breaking tests
  • 7
    Out of the box code coverage
  • 7
    Promise support
  • 6
    One stop shop for unit testing
  • 3
    Great documentation
  • 2
    Assert Library Included
  • 1
    Built in watch option with interactive filtering menu
  • 1
    Preset support
  • 0
    Can be used for BDD
  • 0
    Karma
CONS OF JEST
  • 4
    Documentation
  • 4
    Ambiguous configuration
  • 3
    Difficult
  • 2
    Many bugs still not fixed months/years after reporting
  • 2
    Multiple error messages for same error
  • 2
    Difficult to run single test/describe/file
  • 2
    Ambiguous
  • 2
    Bugged
  • 1
    BeforeAll timing out makes all passing tests fail
  • 1
    Slow
  • 1
    Reporter is too general
  • 1
    Unstable
  • 1
    Bad docs
  • 1
    Still does't support .mjs files natively
  • 1
    Can't fail beforeAll to abort tests
  • 0
    Interaction with watch mode on terminal

related Jest posts

Robert Zuber

We are in the process of adopting Next.js as our React framework and using Storybook to help build our React components in isolation. This new part of our frontend is written in TypeScript, and we use Emotion for CSS/styling. For delivering data, we use GraphQL and Apollo. Jest, Percy, and Cypress are used for testing.

See more
Shared insights
on
CypressCypressJestJest

As we all know testing is an important part of any application. To assist with our testing we are going to use both Cypress and Jest. We feel these tools complement each other and will help us get good coverage of our code. We will use Cypress for our end to end testing as we've found it quite user friendly. Jest will be used for our unit tests because we've seen how many larger companies use it with great success.

See more
Jasmine logo

Jasmine

4.8K
1.5K
186
DOM-less simple JavaScript testing framework
4.8K
1.5K
+ 1
186
PROS OF JASMINE
  • 64
    Can also be used for tdd
  • 49
    Open source
  • 18
    Originally from RSpec
  • 15
    Great community
  • 14
    No dependencies, not even DOM
  • 10
    Easy to setup
  • 8
    Simple
  • 3
    Created by Pivotal-Labs
  • 2
    Works with KarmaJs
  • 1
    Jasmine is faster than selenium in angular application
  • 1
    SpyOn to fake calls
  • 1
    Async and promises are easy calls with "done"
CONS OF JASMINE
  • 2
    Unfriendly error logs

related Jasmine posts

Joshua Dean Küpper
CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 7 upvotes · 602K views

For our internal team and collaboration panel we use Nuxt.js (with TypeScript that is transpiled into ES6), Webpack and npm. We enjoy the opinionated nature of Nuxt.js over vanilla Vue.js, as we would end up using all of the components Nuxt.js incorporates anyways and we can adhere to the conventions setup by the Nuxt.js project, which allows us to get better support in case we run into any dead ends. Webpack allows us to create reproducable builds and also debug our application with hot reloads, which greately increased the pace at which we are able to perform and test changes. We also incorporated a lot of testing (ESLint, Chai, Jasmine, Nightwatchjs) into our pipelines and can trigger those jobs through GitLab CI. All packages are fetched through npm, so that we can keep our git repositories slim and are notified of new updates aswell as reported security flaws.

See more
Sai Chaitanya Mankala
Tech Lead at KIOT Innovations · | 6 upvotes · 859.5K views

Protractor or Cypress for ionic-angular?

We have a huge ionic-angular app with almost 100 pages and 10+ injectables. There are no tests written yet. Before we start, we need some suggestions about the framework. Would you suggest Cypress or Angular's Protractor with Jasmine / Karma for a heavy ionic app with Angular?

See more
JUnit logo

JUnit

7.3K
607
0
A programmer-oriented testing framework for Java
7.3K
607
+ 1
0
PROS OF JUNIT
    Be the first to leave a pro
    CONS OF JUNIT
      Be the first to leave a con

      related JUnit posts

      We are looking for a Testing Tool that can integrate with Java/ React/ Go/ Python/ Node.js. Which amongst the three tools JUnit, NUnit & Selenium would be the best for this use case?

      See more
      Joshua Dean Küpper
      CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 1 upvote · 559.6K views

      We use JUnit for our Java Unit and Integration tests in Version 5. Combined with @JMockit2 and @truth (from Google) we perform all kinds of tests on our minecraft, standalone and microservice architecture.

      We prefer JUnit over TestNG because of the bigger community, better support and the generally more agile development. JUnit integrates nicely with most software, while TestNG support is a little more limited.

      See more
      Selenium logo

      Selenium

      15.7K
      12.3K
      525
      Web Browser Automation
      15.7K
      12.3K
      + 1
      525
      PROS OF SELENIUM
      • 175
        Automates browsers
      • 154
        Testing
      • 101
        Essential tool for running test automation
      • 24
        Record-Playback
      • 24
        Remote Control
      • 8
        Data crawling
      • 7
        Supports end to end testing
      • 6
        Easy set up
      • 6
        Functional testing
      • 4
        The Most flexible monitoring system
      • 3
        End to End Testing
      • 3
        Easy to integrate with build tools
      • 2
        Comparing the performance selenium is faster than jasm
      • 2
        Record and playback
      • 2
        Compatible with Python
      • 2
        Easy to scale
      • 2
        Integration Tests
      • 0
        Integrated into Selenium-Jupiter framework
      CONS OF SELENIUM
      • 8
        Flaky tests
      • 4
        Slow as needs to make browser (even with no gui)
      • 2
        Update browser drivers

      related Selenium posts

      Kamil Kowalski
      Lead Architect at Fresha · | 28 upvotes · 3.8M views

      When you think about test automation, it’s crucial to make it everyone’s responsibility (not just QA Engineers'). We started with Selenium and Java, but with our platform revolving around Ruby, Elixir and JavaScript, QA Engineers were left alone to automate tests. Cypress was the answer, as we could switch to JS and simply involve more people from day one. There's a downside too, as it meant testing on Chrome only, but that was "good enough" for us + if really needed we can always cover some specific cases in a different way.

      See more
      Benjamin Poon
      QA Manager - Engineering at HBC Digital · | 8 upvotes · 1.9M views

      For our digital QA organization to support a complex hybrid monolith/microservice architecture, our team took on the lofty goal of building out a commonized UI test automation framework. One of the primary requisites included a technical minimalist threshold such that an engineer or analyst with fundamental knowledge of JavaScript could automate their tests with greater ease. Just to list a few: - Nightwatchjs - Selenium - Cucumber - GitHub - Go.CD - Docker - ExpressJS - React - PostgreSQL

      With this structure, we're able to combine the automation efforts of each team member into a centralized repository while also providing new relevant metrics to business owners.

      See more
      Chai logo

      Chai

      5.4K
      193
      0
      A BDD / TDD assertion library
      5.4K
      193
      + 1
      0
      PROS OF CHAI
        Be the first to leave a pro
        CONS OF CHAI
          Be the first to leave a con

          related Chai posts

          Joshua Dean Küpper
          CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 7 upvotes · 602K views

          For our internal team and collaboration panel we use Nuxt.js (with TypeScript that is transpiled into ES6), Webpack and npm. We enjoy the opinionated nature of Nuxt.js over vanilla Vue.js, as we would end up using all of the components Nuxt.js incorporates anyways and we can adhere to the conventions setup by the Nuxt.js project, which allows us to get better support in case we run into any dead ends. Webpack allows us to create reproducable builds and also debug our application with hot reloads, which greately increased the pace at which we are able to perform and test changes. We also incorporated a lot of testing (ESLint, Chai, Jasmine, Nightwatchjs) into our pipelines and can trigger those jobs through GitLab CI. All packages are fetched through npm, so that we can keep our git repositories slim and are notified of new updates aswell as reported security flaws.

          See more

          React LoopBack Node.js ExpressJS Elasticsearch Kibana Logstash Sequelize Mocha Chai Visual Studio Code are the combo of technologies being used by me to build BestPrice Extension with all its micro-services & Web-based fragments

          See more
          SinonJS logo

          SinonJS

          3.4K
          38
          1
          Standalone test spies, stubs and mocks for JavaScript
          3.4K
          38
          + 1
          1
          PROS OF SINONJS
          • 1
            Open source
          CONS OF SINONJS
          • 1
            More concepts than Jest
          • 1
            Less questions and answers on StackOverflow than Jest

          related SinonJS posts

          Cypress logo

          Cypress

          3.3K
          2K
          114
          When testing is easy, developers build better things faster and with confidence.
          3.3K
          2K
          + 1
          114
          PROS OF CYPRESS
          • 29
            Open source
          • 22
            Great documentation
          • 20
            Simple usage
          • 18
            Fast
          • 10
            Cross Browser testing
          • 9
            Easy us with CI
          • 5
            Npm install cypress only
          • 1
            Good for beginner automation engineers
          CONS OF CYPRESS
          • 21
            Cypress is weak at cross-browser testing
          • 14
            Switch tabs : Cypress can'nt support
          • 12
            No iFrame support
          • 9
            No page object support
          • 9
            No multiple domain support
          • 8
            No file upload support
          • 8
            No support for multiple tab control
          • 8
            No xPath support
          • 7
            No support for Safari
          • 7
            Cypress doesn't support native app
          • 7
            Re-run failed tests retries not supported yet
          • 7
            No support for multiple browser control
          • 5
            $20/user/thread for reports
          • 4
            Adobe
          • 4
            Using a non-standard automation protocol
          • 4
            Not freeware
          • 3
            No 'WD wire protocol' support

          related Cypress posts

          Kamil Kowalski
          Lead Architect at Fresha · | 28 upvotes · 3.8M views

          When you think about test automation, it’s crucial to make it everyone’s responsibility (not just QA Engineers'). We started with Selenium and Java, but with our platform revolving around Ruby, Elixir and JavaScript, QA Engineers were left alone to automate tests. Cypress was the answer, as we could switch to JS and simply involve more people from day one. There's a downside too, as it meant testing on Chrome only, but that was "good enough" for us + if really needed we can always cover some specific cases in a different way.

          See more
          Robert Zuber

          We are in the process of adopting Next.js as our React framework and using Storybook to help build our React components in isolation. This new part of our frontend is written in TypeScript, and we use Emotion for CSS/styling. For delivering data, we use GraphQL and Apollo. Jest, Percy, and Cypress are used for testing.

          See more