Development on Va...
Follow
Find tag "PhantomJS"
8.3K views | +23 today
Development on Various Platforms
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Ertunç Efeoğlu from JavaScript for Line of Business Applications
Scoop.it!

Buster.JS - A Browser and NodeJS JavaScript testing toolkit.

Buster.JS - A Browser and NodeJS JavaScript testing toolkit. | Development on Various Platforms | Scoop.it

Buster.JS is a JavaScript test framework for node and browsers.

It does browser testing with browser automation (think JsTestDriver), QUnit style static HTML page testing, testing in headless browsers (PhantomJS, jsdom), and more. Write your test case with Buster.JS and run it both in Node.js and in a real browser.

There’s a public API for almost everything. You can write reporters for customizing the output of buster test (we already have xUnit XML, traditional dots, specification, tap, TeamCity and more), write extensions that wrap other testing frameworks (we already have buster-jstestdriver), add your own testing syntax (we ship with xUnit and BDD), and much more. Again, the overview lists many of these things.

 


Via Jan Hesse
more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Ertunç Efeoğlu from JavaScript for Line of Business Applications
Scoop.it!

Incredibly convenient testing of front-end Javascript with Node.js

Incredibly convenient testing of front-end Javascript with Node.js | Development on Various Platforms | Scoop.it

You do have automated testing for your front-end Javascript application / library / framework don’t you? And tests work equally well at console, browsers and Travis aren’t they? And you run them in every possible browser on each release (or even push) right? If the answer is no, you might be doing it wrong. Let’s see if we can do something about it!

This article briefly describes a little piece of theory behind testing of standalone front-end projects, issues that you are likely to meet and the solution I came up with.

When it comes to testing, the first question is — which framework are we going to use? There are numerous articles on the Internet that describe pros and cons of those.

I personally prefer Jasmine and Mocha (coupled with CoffeeScript and Chai they feel so much like RSpec). But it’s only a matter of taste in fact. Their capabilities are more or less equal.

Let’s say we have a framework. Then we can manually create HTML file, include JS we want to test, open it in a browser and, well, test. It’s certainly a kind of automatic testing already but still so far away from something reasonable. And the first thing to think about is Continuous Integration. You can only run such tests manually and see the results with your eyes. No “on-commit runs”, no Travis integration. Sadness.



Via Jan Hesse
more...
No comment yet.