Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

AVA

104
187
+ 1
33
Enzyme

594
329
+ 1
0
Protractor

697
452
+ 1
26
Advice on AVA, Enzyme, and Protractor
Yildiz Dila
testmanager/automation tester at medicalservice · | 5 upvotes · 130.7K views
Needs advice
on
Protractor
and
Cypress

In the company I will be building test automation framework and my new company develops apps mainly using AngularJS/TypeScript. I was planning to build Protractor-Jasmine framework but a friend of mine told me about Cypress and heard that its users are very satisfied with it. I am trying to understand the capabilities of Cypress and as the final goal to differentiate these two tools. Can anyone advice me on this in a nutshell pls...

See more
Replies (2)
Kevin Emery
QE Systems Engineer at Discovery, Inc. · | 3 upvotes · 51.3K views

I've used both Protractor and Cypress extensively. Cypress is the easier and more reliable tool, whereas Protractor is the more powerful tool. Your choice of tool should depend on your specific testing needs. Here are some advantages and disadvantages of each tool:

Cypress advantages:

  • Faster

  • More reliable (tends to throw fewer intermittent false failures)

  • Easier to read code (handles promises gracefully)

Cypress disadvantages:

  • Cannot switch between browser tabs

  • Cannot switch to iFrames

  • Cannot specify clicks or keypresses explicitly as if a real user was interacting

  • Cannot move the mouse to specific co-ordinates

  • Sometimes has trouble switching between different top-level domains, so not good for testing external links

  • Cypress is a newer tool with less extensive documentation and less community support

Protractor advantages:

  • More powerful because it is Selenium-based - it can switch between tabs, it can handle external links to other domains, it can handle iFrames, simulate keypresses and clicks, and move the mouse to specific co-ordinates within the browser.

  • More extensive community support and documentation

Protractor disadvantages:

  • Slower and more brittle - in general there is a higher likelihood of cryptic and/or intermittent errors which may cause your tests to fail even though there is nothing wrong with your application

  • For highly experienced automation engineers, the fundamental "brittle" nature of Selenium can be worked around - it can be reliable but only if you really know what you are doing

  • Less graceful handling of promises - relies on async/await or .then to manage the order of execution. Therefore it is a bit harder to read the code.

  • Harder to set up, and the method of setup impacts its reliability. For example, a hub/node configuration where the selenium jar is on a different physical machine than the browser under test will cause unreliability in your tests. Not everyone knows about this type of thing, so it's common to find Selenium frameworks that are set up poorly.

It's probably better to use Cypress if

  • you're at a smaller company and have a close relationship with developers who can help write hooks or stubs in their code to assist your testing

  • you don't need to do things like switch between tabs or test links to external top-level domains

It's probably better to use Protractor if

  • You might need to switch between tabs or test external links to other domains within the scope of your framework

  • You want to use a more accurate simulation of how a real user interacts with a browser (i.e. click at this location, type these keys)

  • You're at a company where you won't have any support from developers in writing hooks or stubs to make their code more testable in a less powerful framework like Cypress

See more
Jian Wang
Web Engineer at sentaca · | 1 upvotes · 80.1K views
Recommends

Please try Handow, the e2e tool basing on Puppeteer.

Gherkin syntax compatible

Chrome/Chromium orentied, driven by Puppeteer engine

Complete JavaScript programming

Create test suites rapidly without coding (or a little bit), basing on built-in steps library

Schedule test with plans and arrange stories with sequential stages

Fast running, execute story groups in parallel by multi-workers

Built-in single page report render

Cover page view, REST API and cookies test

https://github.com/newlifewj/handow

http://demo.shm.handow.org/reports

See more
Decisions about AVA, Enzyme, and Protractor

Postman will be used to do integration testing with the backend API we create. It offers a clean interface to create many requests, and you can even organize these requests into collections. It helps to test the backend API first to make sure it's working before using it in the front-end. Jest can also be used for testing and is already embedded into React. Not only does it offer unit testing support in javascript, it can also do snapshot testing for the front-end to make sure components are rendering correctly. Enzyme is complementary to Jest and offers more functions such as shallow rendering. UnitTest will be used for Python testing as it is simple, has a lot of functionality and already built in with python. Sentry will be used for keeping track of errors as it is also easily integratable with Heroku because they offer it as an add-on. LogDNA will be used for tracking logs which are not errors and is also a Heroku add-on. Its good to have a separate service to record logs, monitor, track and even fix errors in real-time so our application can run more smoothly.

See more
Get Advice from developers at your company using Private StackShare. Sign up for Private StackShare.
Learn More
Pros of AVA
Pros of Enzyme
Pros of Protractor
  • 13
    Simple and fast
  • 6
    Parallel test running
  • 5
    Open source
  • 3
    Promise support
  • 3
    Test code Instrumenting
  • 2
    Babel integration
  • 1
    ESM Ready
    Be the first to leave a pro
    • 8
      Easy setup
    • 7
      Quick tests implementation
    • 4
      Open source
    • 4
      Promise support
    • 3
      Flexible

    Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

    Cons of AVA
    Cons of Enzyme
    Cons of Protractor
    • 1
      No built-in support for DOM
    • 1
      No source files compilation
      Be the first to leave a con
      • 3
        Limited

      Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

      What is AVA?

      Even though JavaScript is single-threaded, IO in Node.js can happen in parallel due to its async nature. AVA takes advantage of this and runs your tests concurrently, which is especially beneficial for IO heavy tests. In addition, test files are run in parallel as separate processes, giving you even better performance and an isolated environment for each test file.

      What is Enzyme?

      Enzyme is a JavaScript Testing utility for React that makes it easier to assert, manipulate, and traverse your React Components' output.

      What is Protractor?

      Protractor is an end-to-end test framework for Angular and AngularJS applications. Protractor runs tests against your application running in a real browser, interacting with it as a user would.

      Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

      What companies use AVA?
      What companies use Enzyme?
      What companies use Protractor?

      Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

      What tools integrate with AVA?
      What tools integrate with Enzyme?
      What tools integrate with Protractor?
        No integrations found

        Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

        What are some alternatives to AVA, Enzyme, and Protractor?
        Jest
        Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine.
        EVA
        Equipping you with hundreds of symbols and dozens or styles configurations, it makes sure the design stays consistent across all of your applications and platforms.
        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.
        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.
        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.
        See all alternatives