Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Jasmine vs Selenium: What are the differences?
Key Differences Between Jasmine and Selenium
Jasmine and Selenium are two popular testing tools used for different purposes. While Jasmine is primarily used for testing JavaScript code, Selenium is used for testing web applications. Here are the key differences between the two:
Syntax: Jasmine uses a behavior-driven development (BDD) syntax, which allows developers to write tests in a more human-readable format. On the other hand, Selenium uses a different syntax that is more focused on interacting with web elements and simulating user actions.
Execution Environment: Jasmine runs tests in a standalone JavaScript environment, such as a web browser or Node.js, allowing tests to be executed independently without the need for any specific browser or setup. Selenium, on the other hand, requires the use of a web browser and relies on a WebDriver to interact with the browser and execute tests.
Scope of Testing: Jasmine is primarily focused on unit testing, where individual units of code are tested in isolation. It provides a rich set of features for mocking and stubbing resources to facilitate unit testing. Selenium, on the other hand, is more suited for functional and end-to-end testing of web applications, where the entire application is tested as a whole, including user interactions and page navigation.
Integration: Jasmine can be easily integrated with other JavaScript testing frameworks and build tools, allowing developers to incorporate it seamlessly into their development workflow. Selenium, on the other hand, requires additional setup and customization to integrate with different testing frameworks and tools, making it less flexible in terms of integration.
Supported Languages: Jasmine is primarily designed for testing JavaScript code and works well with JavaScript-based frameworks like Angular and React. Selenium, on the other hand, supports multiple programming languages like Java, Python, C#, and Ruby, making it more versatile in terms of language support.
Parallel Testing: Selenium provides built-in support for parallel testing, where multiple tests can be executed concurrently across different browsers or test environments. This allows for faster execution and better utilization of testing resources. Jasmine, on the other hand, does not have native support for parallel testing, although it can be achieved using external tools or libraries.
In summary, Jasmine is a JavaScript testing framework focused on unit testing and has a more human-readable syntax, while Selenium is a web application testing framework that supports multiple programming languages and is more suited for functional and end-to-end testing.
we are having one web application developed in Reacts.js. in the application, we have only 4 to 5 pages that we need to test. I am having experience in selenium with java. Please suggets which tool I should use. and why ............................ ............................ .............................
with the help of selenium we can automate react js for functional testing
We use Selenium for our FDA validation testing.
For those not familiar with FDA and NASA quality control initiatives and testing requirements, suffice it to say that the federal government tends to talk in terms of 'validation and verification testing' in many of its' regulations. There's decades of history behind this term, and the three important takeaways are the following:
First, a project has to have two or more testing strategies, so as not to fall into a bias with a single testing strategy. Second, one of those testing strategies has to be user-centric, commonly known as validation testing. Examples include crash test dummies and end-to-end software acceptance tests. Third, most any other testing strategy can qualify as verification testing.
So, we use Selenium for our FDA validation testing, because it simulates a user walking through the software.
It's big and bloated and slow, and the legacy version runs on Java, and it's brittle and doubles the amount of code we have to write, and is otherwise a total pain in the ass. But it's like folding your parachute before skydiving or having a depth gauge when SCUBA diving or placing bolts when climbing a wall. There are simply some tasks that you don't want to do without safety gear.
And for all its' pain to use, Selenium is like safety gear for building your tech stack. We've migrated across a half a dozen user interfaces, two entirely different back-end languages, three or four data protocols, and countless utilities over the years. And Selenium warns us when we're in danger and it catches us when we fall.
We use Mocha for our FDA verification testing. It's integrated into Meteor, our upstream web application framework. We like how battle tested it is, its' syntax, its' options of reporters, and countless other features. Most everybody can agree on mocha, and that gets us half-way through our FDA verification and validation (V&V) testing strategy.
As bioinformaticists, we regularly get asked to develop apps or websites which are HIPAA compliant, connect to an EHR, or are ready for FDA regulation.
Regarding the last, the FDA has built up best practices over the past 40 or 50 years regarding "validation and verification" testing. Without going into a lengthy history of FDA regulations, suffice it to say that there are two important distinctions about validation and verification testing - the first of which is that there has to be more than one testing methodology, so that manufacturers or developers don't get a sort of biased tunnel vision; and the second is that at least one of the testing methodologies has to be user-centric. So, it's not enough to test the engine of a car, a manufacturer also must have crash test dummies.
In the world of software written for hospitals and clinical environments, we interpret the verification and validation testing requirements in terms of requiring more than one testing framework, one of which is an end-to-end testing harness using a technology like Selenium. It's not enough to have unit testing, but we also need e2e acceptance testing. Selenium has traditionally been the only game in town, and has been a struggle to work with at times. But it's a tank, and keeps on rolling. We particularly like recent incarnations using Chromedriver and WebDriver protocols, which is slowly reducing the reliance on the legacy Java server.
Pros of Jasmine
- Can also be used for tdd64
- Open source49
- Originally from RSpec18
- Great community15
- No dependencies, not even DOM14
- Easy to setup10
- Simple8
- Created by Pivotal-Labs3
- Works with KarmaJs2
- Jasmine is faster than selenium in angular application1
- SpyOn to fake calls1
- Async and promises are easy calls with "done"1
Pros of Selenium
- Automates browsers175
- Testing154
- Essential tool for running test automation101
- Record-Playback24
- Remote Control24
- Data crawling8
- Supports end to end testing7
- Easy set up6
- Functional testing6
- The Most flexible monitoring system4
- End to End Testing3
- Easy to integrate with build tools3
- Comparing the performance selenium is faster than jasm2
- Record and playback2
- Compatible with Python2
- Easy to scale2
- Integration Tests2
- Integrated into Selenium-Jupiter framework0
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Jasmine
- Unfriendly error logs2
Cons of Selenium
- Flaky tests8
- Slow as needs to make browser (even with no gui)4
- Update browser drivers2