CodeceptJS vs Cucumber

Overview

Cucumber

Stacks1.4K

Followers927

Votes36

CodeceptJS

Stacks117

Followers217

Votes52

CodeceptJS vs Cucumber: What are the differences?

Introduction:

CodeceptJS and Cucumber are both popular testing frameworks used for test automation. While they serve a similar purpose, there are significant differences between the two.

Parallel Execution: CodeceptJS allows for parallel test execution, enabling tests to run concurrently, which can significantly reduce test execution time. Cucumber, on the other hand, does not inherently support parallel execution, requiring additional configurations or tools to achieve similar functionality.
Syntax: CodeceptJS utilizes a JavaScript-centric syntax, making it well-suited for developers with JavaScript knowledge. Cucumber, on the other hand, uses Gherkin syntax, which is a business-readable, domain-specific language designed to facilitate collaboration between stakeholders and technical teams.
Tools Integration: CodeceptJS provides seamless integration with popular testing tools like WebDriver, Puppeteer, and Protractor. It offers built-in support for various web testing frameworks, making it easier to incorporate different tools into the testing workflow. Cucumber, while also supporting these tools, does not provide the same level of built-in integration and requires additional dependencies for tool compatibility.
Step Definitions: CodeceptJS uses step definitions to define test steps and actions. These step definitions are written using JavaScript and provide a straightforward way to express test logic. Cucumber, on the other hand, relies on feature files, where test scenarios are written in a human-readable Gherkin format. Each step in a scenario is associated with a step definition, which must be implemented separately.
Reporting: CodeceptJS offers a built-in reporting mechanism that generates detailed test reports in different formats. These reports provide comprehensive insights into test results, including test execution status, duration, and failure details. Cucumber, while also providing reporting capabilities, may require additional plugins or configurations to generate detailed reports.
Community Support: CodeceptJS has a thriving community of developers who actively contribute to the framework, providing support, sharing knowledge, and maintaining plugins and extensions. Cucumber also has a strong community but may have a somewhat narrower focus due to its specific use of behavior-driven development (BDD) methodologies.

In summary, CodeceptJS and Cucumber differ in their support for parallel execution, syntax, tools integration, step definition approaches, reporting capabilities, 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)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

Cucumber	CodeceptJS
Cucumber is a tool that supports Behaviour-Driven Development (BDD) - a software development process that aims to enhance software quality and reduce maintenance costs.	It is a modern end to end testing framework with a special BDD-style syntax. The test is written as a linear scenario of user's action on a site. Each test is described inside a Scenario function with I object passed into it.
-	Behavior Driven Development; Acceptance Testing; Data Driven Tests
Statistics
Stacks 1.4K	Stacks 117
Followers 927	Followers 217
Votes 36	Votes 52
Pros & Cons
Pros 20 Simple Syntax 8 Simple usage 5 Huge community 3 Nice report	Pros 10 Readability 9 Cross browser support 9 Full browser control 8 Open source 6 Community Cons 2 Small community 1 Not a framework by itself
Integrations
No integrations available	JavaScript SilverStripe Wallaby.js MockIt (open source) Glamorous Majestic GUI

What are some alternatives to Cucumber, CodeceptJS?

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.

Jest

Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Related Comparisons

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana

CodeceptJS vs Cucumber: What are the differences?

Introduction:

CodeceptJS and Cucumber are both popular testing frameworks used for test automation. While they serve a similar purpose, there are significant differences between the two.

Parallel Execution: CodeceptJS allows for parallel test execution, enabling tests to run concurrently, which can significantly reduce test execution time. Cucumber, on the other hand, does not inherently support parallel execution, requiring additional configurations or tools to achieve similar functionality.
Syntax: CodeceptJS utilizes a JavaScript-centric syntax, making it well-suited for developers with JavaScript knowledge. Cucumber, on the other hand, uses Gherkin syntax, which is a business-readable, domain-specific language designed to facilitate collaboration between stakeholders and technical teams.
Tools Integration: CodeceptJS provides seamless integration with popular testing tools like WebDriver, Puppeteer, and Protractor. It offers built-in support for various web testing frameworks, making it easier to incorporate different tools into the testing workflow. Cucumber, while also supporting these tools, does not provide the same level of built-in integration and requires additional dependencies for tool compatibility.
Step Definitions: CodeceptJS uses step definitions to define test steps and actions. These step definitions are written using JavaScript and provide a straightforward way to express test logic. Cucumber, on the other hand, relies on feature files, where test scenarios are written in a human-readable Gherkin format. Each step in a scenario is associated with a step definition, which must be implemented separately.
Reporting: CodeceptJS offers a built-in reporting mechanism that generates detailed test reports in different formats. These reports provide comprehensive insights into test results, including test execution status, duration, and failure details. Cucumber, while also providing reporting capabilities, may require additional plugins or configurations to generate detailed reports.
Community Support: CodeceptJS has a thriving community of developers who actively contribute to the framework, providing support, sharing knowledge, and maintaining plugins and extensions. Cucumber also has a strong community but may have a somewhat narrower focus due to its specific use of behavior-driven development (BDD) methodologies.

In summary, CodeceptJS and Cucumber differ in their support for parallel execution, syntax, tools integration, step definition approaches, reporting capabilities, and community support.