Comments on: JUTest – Simple Javascript Play Around Area / Unit Tester http://robrohan.com/2008/07/31/jutest-simple-javascript-play-around-area-unit-tester/ 技术任意 Fri, 04 Dec 2009 04:36:16 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: 小罗 http://robrohan.com/2008/07/31/jutest-simple-javascript-play-around-area-unit-tester/comment-page-1/#comment-6422 小罗 Fri, 01 Aug 2008 14:52:01 +0000 http://robrohan.com/?p=807#comment-6422 <p>JSUnit looks to be a more like a traditional unit testing process. The single unit of something looks like it's an HTML file in JSUnit. Whereas JUTest is more of a js focused include test.</p> <p>This is designed more around a harness idea with unit testing as a nice addition. It also looks to be a bit easier to print out the tests with JUTest - if that is something you care about.</p> <p>To save large groups of test JSUnit looks nice. Meaning if you have 6 projects and you wanted to keep unit tests on each project then JSUnit, because it includes HTML files for the test, would just use the one run time for all projects. With JUTest you'd have to write different index.html files for each project, so could possibly be a little disjointed.</p> <p>JSUnit has startUp and tearDown JUTest doesn't (but JUTests runs you methods in order so that doesn't really matter)</p> <p>They are quite similar. I think maybe the shell, and printing are what set them apart. For a quick sentence separation "IMO, JSUnit was written specifically to emulate a traditional unit testing framework, JUTest was written as a test harness / environment with aspects of traditional Unit testing"</p> <p>I haven't actually used JSUnit mind you...</p> JSUnit looks to be a more like a traditional unit testing process. The single unit of something looks like it’s an HTML file in JSUnit. Whereas JUTest is more of a js focused include test.

This is designed more around a harness idea with unit testing as a nice addition. It also looks to be a bit easier to print out the tests with JUTest – if that is something you care about.

To save large groups of test JSUnit looks nice. Meaning if you have 6 projects and you wanted to keep unit tests on each project then JSUnit, because it includes HTML files for the test, would just use the one run time for all projects. With JUTest you’d have to write different index.html files for each project, so could possibly be a little disjointed.

JSUnit has startUp and tearDown JUTest doesn’t (but JUTests runs you methods in order so that doesn’t really matter)

They are quite similar. I think maybe the shell, and printing are what set them apart. For a quick sentence separation “IMO, JSUnit was written specifically to emulate a traditional unit testing framework, JUTest was written as a test harness / environment with aspects of traditional Unit testing”

I haven’t actually used JSUnit mind you…

]]> By: bill shelton http://robrohan.com/2008/07/31/jutest-simple-javascript-play-around-area-unit-tester/comment-page-1/#comment-6421 bill shelton Fri, 01 Aug 2008 13:19:45 +0000 http://robrohan.com/?p=807#comment-6421 <p>Nice stuff, Rob! Hey, how does this compare with jsunit?</p> <p>best, bill</p> Nice stuff, Rob! Hey, how does this compare with jsunit?

best, bill

]]>