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

CodeceptJS

103
217
+ 1
52
Cypress

2.4K
2K
+ 1
115
Add tool

CodeceptJS vs Cypress: What are the differences?

Introduction:

CodeceptJS and Cypress are both popular automation testing frameworks used for testing web applications. While they serve a similar purpose, there are several key differences between these two frameworks. In this markdown, we will explore these differences in detail.

  1. Execution Speed: One major difference between CodeceptJS and Cypress is the execution speed. CodeceptJS executes tests in the backend, using WebDriver protocols, while Cypress runs directly in the browser. This allows Cypress to have faster test execution speed as it has direct access to the DOM.

  2. API Architecture: Another key difference lies in the API architecture of CodeceptJS and Cypress. CodeceptJS implements the Fluent API style, where each action is defined as a single method call. On the other hand, Cypress follows the Chaining API style, where actions are chained together using dot notation. This can result in a more concise and readable code in Cypress.

  3. Assertions: CodeceptJS uses the inclusive assert library, which allows usage of various assertion styles like Should.js, Chai.js, or Node.js assert. In contrast, Cypress has built-in assertions using Chai.js along with other assertion libraries like jQuery assertions, Sinon assertions, and more. This gives Cypress greater flexibility when it comes to assertions.

  4. Debugging Capabilities: When it comes to debugging, CodeceptJS provides extensive debugging capabilities. It offers a debug scenario feature that allows pausing and stepping through the test execution. Cypress, on the other hand, provides a real-time reloading feature that enables developers to see the changes in the application in real-time as the tests are executed.

  5. Support for Browsers: CodeceptJS supports multiple browsers as it uses WebDriver and WebDriverIO backend. It can run tests in Chrome, Firefox, Microsoft Edge, and more. In contrast, Cypress focuses on providing an optimal experience for running tests in Chrome-based browsers. While it supports other browsers through plugins, its main focus remains on Chrome.

  6. Community and Ecosystem: CodeceptJS has been in the market for a longer time and has a larger community and ecosystem. It has a vast selection of plugins and supports various test frameworks like Mocha, Chai, and more. Cypress, on the other hand, is relatively newer and has a smaller community. However, it has gained popularity due to its simplicity and ease of use.

In Summary, CodeceptJS and Cypress differ in terms of execution speed, API architecture, assertions, debugging capabilities, browser support, and community size.

Advice on CodeceptJS and Cypress
Yildiz Dila
testmanager/automation tester at medicalservice · | 5 upvotes · 267.4K views
Needs advice
on
CypressCypress
and
ProtractorProtractor

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. · | 4 upvotes · 164.5K views
Recommends
on
CypressCypressProtractorProtractor

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 · 193.3K 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 CodeceptJS and Cypress
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
Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
Learn More
Pros of CodeceptJS
Pros of Cypress
  • 10
    Readability
  • 9
    Full browser control
  • 9
    Cross browser support
  • 8
    Open source
  • 6
    Community
  • 5
    Flexible Driver
  • 3
    Great documentation
  • 2
    Agnostic
  • 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
  • 2
    Good for beginner automation engineers

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of CodeceptJS
Cons of Cypress
  • 2
    Small community
  • 1
    Not a framework by itself
  • 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

Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

- No public GitHub repository available -

What is CodeceptJS?

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.

What is 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.

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

What companies use CodeceptJS?
What companies use Cypress?
Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
Learn More

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

What tools integrate with CodeceptJS?
What tools integrate with Cypress?

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

Blog Posts

What are some alternatives to CodeceptJS and Cypress?
Codeception
Full-stack testing framework for PHP. Run browsers tests, framework tests, APIs tests, unit tests with ease.
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.
BrowserStack
BrowserStack is the leading test platform built for developers & QAs to expand test coverage, scale & optimize testing with cross-browser, real device cloud, accessibility, visual testing, test management, and test observability.
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.
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.
See all alternatives