tom at macwright.org
Thu Sep 13 14:02:36 BST 2012
in its current state is well-written for tests - it's too much a bundle of
interconnected DOM logic to be easily split up into unit tests.
Also, while I'm a big fan of mocha for nodejs tests, I'm skeptical of its
browser support - it seems to fail entirely in IE, which is kind of the
point of browser testing for me. Is this just me making a mistake? Jasmine
has fared better in multiple browsers afaik.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:05 PM, John Firebaugh
<john.firebaugh at gmail.com>wrote:
> I was the contributor who suggested introducing Capybara-based integration
> tests. I've used them in the past and found them very helpful. It's
> possible to use Capybara without Selenium, but I've found that most often I
> and interact with the page when something goes wrong, which was a
> disadvantage with headless drivers. It sounds like the consensus is to
> avoid Selenium at this time -- that's fine (though I'd be curious if those
> that have used it in the past were using something like Capybara, which I
> find lessens the pain quite a bit).
> test, at least at the unit level. I suggest using Konacha<https://github.com/jfirebaugh/konacha>,
> a JS testing harness that I created and maintain. It's similar to Jasmine,
> though better integrated with the Rails asset pipeline and built using a
> newer, and better engineered, generation of JS testing libraries, mocha<http://visionmedia.github.com/mocha/>and
> chai <http://chaijs.com/>.
> Here's an example of what Konacha tests look like:
> Tests run in the browser -- while developing, re-running is as simple as
> refreshing the page. For CI, you can run them with Selenium or any other
> driver supported by Capybara. Check out the Konacha README for more details
> and let me know if you have any questions.
> rails-dev mailing list
> rails-dev at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rails-dev