Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Jest vs CodeceptJS: What are the differences?
Jest: Painless JavaScript Unit Testing. Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine; CodeceptJS: Modern End 2 End Testing Framework for NodeJS. 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.
Jest and CodeceptJS can be primarily classified as "Javascript Testing Framework" tools.
Some of the features offered by Jest are:
- Familiar Approach: Built on top of the Jasmine test framework, using familiar expect(value).toBe(other) assertions
- Mock by Default: Automatically mocks CommonJS modules returned by require(), making most existing code testable
- Short Feedback Loop: DOM APIs are mocked and tests run in parallel via a small node.js command line utility
On the other hand, CodeceptJS provides the following key features:
- Behavior Driven Development
- Acceptance Testing
- Data Driven Tests
Jest and CodeceptJS are both open source tools. It seems that Jest with 26.9K GitHub stars and 3.68K forks on GitHub has more adoption than CodeceptJS with 2.33K GitHub stars and 401 GitHub forks.
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.
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.
Pros of CodeceptJS
- Readability9
- Full browser control8
- Cross browser support8
- Open source7
- Community6
- Flexible Driver5
- Agnostic2
- Great documentation1
Pros of Jest
- Open source35
- Mock by default makes testing much simpler31
- Testing React Native Apps22
- Parallel test running19
- Fast15
- Bundled with JSDOM to enable DOM testing13
- Out of the box code coverage7
- Mock by default screws up your classes, breaking tests7
- One stop shop for unit testing6
- Promise support6
- Great documentation3
- Built in watch option with interactive filtering menu1
- Preset support1
- Assert Library Included1
- Can be used for BDD0
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of CodeceptJS
- Small community2
- Not a framework by itself1
Cons of Jest
- Documentation3
- Ambiguous configuration3
- Multiple error messages for same error2
- Difficult to run single test/describe/file2
- Ambiguous2
- Many bugs still not fixed months/years after reporting2
- Difficult2
- Bugged1
- Reporter is too general1
- BeforeAll timing out makes all passing tests fail1
- Unstable1
- Bad docs1
- Still does't support .mjs files natively1
- Can't fail beforeAll to abort tests1
- Interaction with watch mode on terminal0